E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSEditor’s note: An earlier version of this post said the American Civil Liberties Union had sued the North Central Regional Library district, based in Wenatchee, Wash., for not offering access to online pornography. The ACLU says that its case was not about pornography but was aimed at overly broad Internet filters that blocked access to legitimate research and political activity.
Libraries in Washington state are continuing to struggle with the issue of Internet access and pornography.
In Seattle, the public library system is holding fast to unrestricted online access to adults despite complaints about men watching pornography in very public settings. In Wenatchee, the North Central Regional Library is defending itself in a years-old lawsuit that says it has gone too far in its attempt to block porn and instead censors legitimate access for research, art and political activism.
The lawsuit in Wenatchee by the American Civil Liberties Union alleges that the library district improperly censors Internet access in an overbroad way. The ACLU suit was brought in 2006 “on behalf of a college student who was prevented from researching for a paper on youth tobacco use, an artist who couldn't look at sites of art galleries and artwork, a political group whose publication ‘Women and Guns’ was blocked, and a man who wanted to update his MySpace page,” the nonprofit advocacy group said in a statement.
The district successfully defended its Internet filtering policy in the state Supreme Court two years ago, but the case is now in a federal court.
Any idea that the lawsuit is aimed at allowing the viewing of pornography is flat-out wrong, the ACLU says.
“There’s nothing in the lawsuit that says we’re suing because of lack of access to pornography,” said Steve Gosset, director of media relations at the Washington, D.C.-based office of the ACLU. “It had nothing to do with pornography.”
Instead, Gosset said, the library’s computer filter “cuts off access to lots of different useful materials that are entirely legal.”
“If something is allowed under law, you have access to it,” he said. “The library should not be the censor.”
But the filters do block pornography, and library officials said that serves the district’s mission to promote reading and lifelong learning.
"We believe having pornography in public places hurts our ability to accomplish our mission," Dan Howard, the library’s director of public services, told NBC station KING 5 in Seattle.
"We are a publicly funded institution," Library Director Dean Marney said in a statement published on the district website. "It is crazy to think that we should be required to use tax dollars to allow open access to Internet pornography or to become illegal casinos."
The North Central Regional Library district, which represents 28 libraries in the central part of Washington, admits its policy puts it in the minority among the state's libraries.
The other end of the spectrum is represented in the Seattle controversy.
A mother with her two children said they saw a man watching what she described as hard-core porn and asked the librarian to act, but was refused. She then wrote to the library and contacted the media, according to SeattlePI.com. Despite the complaint, the Seattle Public Library held fast to its policy of unrestricted online access for adults, SeattlePI.com reported.
SeattlePI.com said the King County Library System has a similar policy: It only filters kids' access on computers. The American Library Association endorses the same stance.
"Sometimes, in a library, you're going to see information that's going to make you uncomfortable," Barbara Jones, director of the association's intellectual freedom office, told radio station KUOW Wednesday.
More content from msnbc.com and NBC News
Leave a Comment:
This happened at the brand new library near my home in 2008. The young victim, a high school student, can no longer see, walk or speak. Now do we really need porn at the library? Check this out: http://www.abcactionnews.com/dpp/news/region_east_hillsborough/brandon/kendrick-morris-found-guilty-on-four-counts-in-bloomingdale-library-rape-trial
Ok lets turn that around. Lets start destroying all chruches where pedophile priests have done evil. After all they allowed it. If school harbors a pedophile teacher lets do the same. I do not support pornagrphic material desgined to arrose and stimulate being viewed in libary it should not. At the same time I don't want someone looking at an ancient statue from greece being considered a pervert. If you look at ancient writings with erotic intent like say a book on kama sutra thats a grey line I am not sure about. Depending on what the person is up to. Cell phones as example not everyone texts and drives but it happens. NOt everyone abuses cell phones but then someone gets offended and everyone loses their rights because of new stupid laws.
All of you miss what this is really about. The ACLU makes all their money on ripping off the taxpayers. They will collect big dollars for this suit whether they win or lose. They really don't care. It's all about the money.
This isn't about porn, it's about censorship. Internet filters are notorious for blocking things that shouldn't be blocked, like web sites concerning breast cancer when you search for breast. A successful policy is one like the one in place in the Multnomah County, Oregon library system. Adults with library cards can choose filtered or unfiltered access. Guests and patrons under 18 get filtered access only. If you are viewing something that others find offensive you are asked to stop. If you don't stop you are asked to leave. If you don't want to leave the resident Sheriff will change your mind and take you to jail for trespassing. Meanwhile, any adult can find what they are looking for and children are protected. Yes, there is the occasional view of a boob. So what?
Proud... it pains me greatly to say this, but I'll agree with you to a point.
However, you as well as I know that unfettered access to this by "adults" could be a means for convicted sexual predators, rapists and child molestors for example, to get around court prohibitions for their acces to this type of material. If they do it on a home computer, there is a direct link and traceable history. Using a "public" computer in a library IS a way to circumvent those court orders.
If there was a way to "monitor" access, photo ID's and dedicated machines for the purpose, I'd say fine. this permits the authorities to determine if there are violations of parole or court orders.
Personally, I don't really care what others view. But I do draw the line at known sex offenders getting "stimulated" and possibly going out to try for the real thing.
So if say your looking at statue from Greece and I go up to librarian and Say I find that offensive that woman statue has full real body parts and he needs to stop right now? What then? Arrest the guy because he made me uncomfortable?
BTW law enforcement already the right to seize everything you view in library by law without a search warrant. The library must comply and may not inform you. Try going in doing research on how to make an atomic bomb or maybe doing research into why Gulf War veterans are sick from something like bio weapons research and see what the hell happens after they think you have left.
Wes, I know LEOs can check after the fact. But if the "user" is not known in the area, and HAS left, to places unknown, other than searching for an unknown individual what recourse do they have?
I admit it's a very difficult topic. And I DON'T claim to have an answer.
swipable library cards that log you in would make this easy. You would need a gov't ID (license, id ect) to obtain a library card that would provide proper access. No I.D. (such as minors) would get a basic library card with restricted access.
If you're an adult that doesn't have an ID, basic library card where you can check out an 'adult' swipable card if you are concerned. What you do illegally would be up to the library to report and law enforcement to investigate. Viewing illegal content can be tracked by date/time stamps and most all libraries have a video system that could easily identify perps.
Porn is not literature, porn is intended and used for sexual stimulation. The family restrooms in the local library are not public for people to have sex in, so a library is not public for all purposes, and some creep shouldn't be getting himself horny, then walking around young girls trying to study.
Why stop at computers? Libraries have video rentals. So why not require public funded libraries to have porn videos and books/magazines as part of their offerings?
Where does it stop?
If one want to watch or listen to that type of material, there are other venues you can go to. Keep that stuff out of libraries.
oregonian: as the Library of Congress is required by law to own at least one copy of every work copyrighted in the US, they have quite a large collection of porn videos, actually.
If this was about censorship, then there would be no access anywhere in the USA.
It is not and never has been about censorship.
American Classless Losers Union? Ass Cum Lickers Union? A Constantly Lame Union? Another Cock Licking User? A Coalition of Lousy Underachievers?
Come on, you all can think of some others!
The "who are you to judge"/"don`t impose your morals on me" comments are the stupidest arguments I`ve heard. Everybody has a limit, everybody has an opinion on how far things should go. What about pedophiles, what about beastiality? "Well, that`s against the law." Oh, you mean someone decided it was wrong and censored it by creating a law that says it`s wrong? Someone stopped it b/c they thought it was wrong?
Pornography is actually outlawed in some countries. Some people still think that little children should not be exposed to it. Bottom line: Freedom does not mean freedom from responsibility. Be the grown-up, bite the bullet. Go watch your porn in the privacy of your own home like most decent human beings!
Let us imagine what searches might be restricted next, based upon an arbitrary panel voting.... Interracial Marriages, Gene therapy, certain books containing obscure pornographic passages, medical journals, foreign language books and websites (English as the only "USA" language) or maybe different political views
I agree that is already going on. However We all should know grown men or even grown women or teenagers for that matter should not be watching Debbie does Dallas in a public library not 15 steps away from little Timmy and Suise there to read 15 books by march for their school... However if you draw the line not now but later people will begin to abuse it. Next only rich can view certain materials, then only government employees may view certain books information and flow of ideas will be strictly controlled by the state.
Wes... the flow of ideas already IS controlled by the state. Have you looked at any of the many "politically correct" text books grade school children today use?
And lets not forget that in some school libraries, classics like Huckleberry Finn and Catcher in the Rye are already banned. I'm sure there are others as well, but those are the two that came to mind.
I dont support guys, women, teenagers getting turned on in public infront of small kids I am against that. However now days anytime you pass laws they turn around and few years later abuse them. They being the government I have already lost to many freedoms to want someone telling me what I can view. Same time no freaking human being in their right mind should be watching porn to excite and stimulate in a library.
If a patron wants to view porn, they have 2 choices: 1) View in the privacy of their own home or, 2) View it at an Internet Cafe. Even newsstands cover magazine covers featuring sexual content. This is not a "Free Speech" First Amendment issue, the porn is still readily available at other venues.
The following quote is an absurd statement from an attorney. “This case is about an overly broad filtering policy that has restricted an adult student from using the Internet for a class assignment and a professional photographer from accessing art galleries online,” ACLU cooperating attorney Duncan Manville....
A Professional photographer is going to use a computer with a much higher resolution for viewing photos and more than likely at his place of business with his state of the art Mac. The "ADULT" student would have access to the library at his college or university that would require identification to allow access.
Public libraries should have the ability to restrict access to porn or illegal activities via computer internet access. They will answer to the local supporters that vote for the funding to maintain the library!
you can't wrap porn and illegal activities into the same blanket here. Porn is protected as non-obscene to adults, see Stanley v. Georgia, and protected as a constitutional right under the 1st amendment, whereas, illegal activities...well of course are not.
I believe there is a way for both sides to come to an agreement as to how to tackle this issue though (see my response further down if interested).
Like Caesar said "Kill all the Lawyers (ACLU)"
Bobw: that's Shakespeare, from Henry VI, Part II. Nothing whatsoever to do with Julius Caesar.
Anyone caught viewing porn in a public place should be put on a sex-offender list. It's no different than exposing themselves on a street corner.
lebin: except that porn is a perfectly legal product and exposing oneself is an illegal activity. Not at all the same thing. And in regards to the sex-offender list: until just within the past decade or so (before Lawrence v. TX), oral sex between any people (even a married couple) was illegal in my state and would have put you on such a list and until within my lifetime states could make adultery illegal and that would put you on such lists. I think such lists have really gone out of control and are doing real harm to people--making it impossible for anyone convicted on any minor sex charge to get a job and thus not be a burden on society.
Are the liberals out to destroy America completely? The Democrats are the main people that support the ACLU. Democrats, It is time to draw the line.
Quit pulling the ACLU card every time you don't get it your way. This isn't Burger King. Get it your way with your own computer!
This is a no win situation. Kids don't need to happen upon a computer with this filter switched off when an adult is finished with it and before the library staff can switch it back on. Here too would be yet another lawsuit by the parents. In this case it is the "adults" crying fowl.
Get your own internet access or borrow a friends. Filing a lawsuit is too easy these days with all the ambulance chaser out there trying to make a buck any way they can. Bring back the frivolous lawsuit countersuet! Make the ACLU pay for a change.
Tell me again, why do we have the ACLU, besides funding attorneys and wasting money?
As a woman, I don't want to go to the library where a man is watching porn. GROSS! If you know what I mean.
Has the ACLU and the Democrats lost all common sense? Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, Common Sense, who has been with us for many years. No one knows for sure how old he was since his birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape. He will be remembered as having cultivated such valuable lessons as knowing when to come in out of the rain, why the early bird gets the worm, life isn't always fair, and maybe it was my fault.
Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don't spend more than you earn) and reliable parenting strategies (adults, not children, are in charge). His health began to deteriorate rapidly when well intentioned but overbearing regulations were set in place. Reports of a six-year-old boy charged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate; teens suspended from school for using mouthwash after lunch; and a teacher fired for reprimanding an unruly student, only worsened his condition.
Common Sense lost ground when parents attacked teachers for doing the job they themselves failed to do in disciplining their unruly children. It declined even further when schools were required to get parental consent to administer Panadol, sun lotion or a sticky plaster to a student but could not inform the parents when a student became pregnant and wanted to have an abortion.
Common Sense lost the will to live as the Ten Commandments became contraband; churches became businesses; and criminals received better treatment than their victims.
Common Sense took a beating when you couldn't defend yourself from a burglar in your own home and the burglar can sue you for assault.
Common Sense finally gave up the will to live after a woman failed to realize that a steaming cup of coffee was hot. She spilled a little in her lap and was promptly awarded a huge settlement.
Common Sense was preceded in death by his parents, Truth and Trust; by his wife, Discretion; by his daughter, Responsibility; and by his son, Reason. He is survived by three stepbrothers: I Know My Rights, Someone Else is to Blame, I'm A Victim.
Not many attended his funeral because so few realized he was gone. If you still remember him, pass this on. If not join the majority and do nothing.
The library already limits what is available by not having every single book on its shelves, not to mention not putting Penthouse on its shelves. If you need some porn, go home.
Sincerely,
A Democrat
Morton: for several years I worked at a large public library in a big city and they indeed had a subscription to Penthouse (and Playboy and Playgirl too).
I am a fairly liberal person and if people want to watch porn(as long as it does not involve children) that is their business. However, a public library is not the place for it regardless of the 1st Amendment. It's too offensive and kids can get access to it. The stance the ACLU is taking is the reason why I never donate money to their organization.....
It's only offensive to some people. I can see why people are upset but I agree that our children should not be subject to such items. However, there are legitimate research material where nude photography or other research material that contains nudity would be legitimate and shouldn't be restricted. The problem is, filtering software basically takes anything 'nude' and blocks it.
Regardless of stance, people have the right to access that material according to Federal law (see freeman vs the people of 1988 I think it is). At the same time, it's illegal to expose children to obscene material. They need to develop a better method for allowing adults to view these in public, such as my suggestion of computers with screen protectors and placed in a non-passerby capable place with filters that can be disabled by request. It wouldn't be that hard to control (as an I.T. person I know you can open up filters with a few quick clicks).
Don't see why they just can't do something like this.
stanley v. georgia would be the law that protects a persons' right to pornography, not the freeman one, that was the right of production or something or other.
I have no issue with what people want to view while in a public setting; however, doesn't federal law prohibit the viewing of obsene material to children illegal? I know title 18 section 2257 protects children in films, but I'm not 100% sure on the viewing of obscene material.
If porn can be viewed in a public access space such as a library, computers should be located in a place where the screens are not easily viewable by people who pass by as well as include screen protectors that are only viewable when in front of them (easy enough).
Filtering obscene content is fine for children and if such filters are used, they should be able to be disabled at the request of an adult. Let them view porn, but at the same time, protect our children from being subject to it.
IF its porn like a statue from greece I am fine with that. If its porn like a movie Say Sexy Vivian meets Gnor the huge alien. No that is now what library is for. However censorship already goes on at libraries. Law enforcment already regualry checks out what is going on with people without them know their privacy has been violated. The law already exists on the books has for a few years now. Censorship exists ironically enough at libraries. I do not agree with allowing pornagraphic materials being viewed for arrosal and stimulation should be allowed.
Sharpe.... that would be too simplistic for some to comprehend.
If they created an "adults with ID only" area, with unfiltered computer access, the problem would go away. If necessary, they could possibly have a small "charge" for the area to offset any additional costs.
It could be very similar to the old "adults only" areas some of the smaller independent video rental (I'm showing my age) places had before the big chains put them out of business.
Stanley v. Georgia gives the constitutional right to view pornography (not specifically in public but in general). A nude statue is not porn, it is art. Huge difference. Pornography is the filming of adult sexually explicit material.
No comment on the rest as I think you are going the wrong way with your post in censorship.
@XD...
I agree there is a simple solution. Having an adults only area though would create a bigger burden in regards to a seperate area though I believe. You would need enough computers to split between two age groups. Some libraries I've been to only have a couple of computer's available. It would be as simple as putting up some cubicle walls, placing the pc monitors facing away from the cubicle opening and being done with it. Filters would still be needed for our youngsters, but again, easy enough if you have a library card that could identify you as an adult when you log into it.
So many ways this could be resolved.