~terry
Sat, Feb 21, 1998 (16:51)
seed
Internet access offers the possibility of viewing pornography and other
types of materials and content that many would argue should not be viewed
by children. "Filtering" software products, such as Cybersitter,
CyberPatrol, NetNanny, SurfWatch, etc. have been developed to allow users
to control what sites will be available for viewing on their desktops, in
essence placing control of the what content can be viewed with end users.
Proponents of filtering products argue that they are the ideal way to
control and monitor net access, particularly for children. Opponents
decry the use of these products as censorship, especially when they are
used in government-supported libraries. The American Library Association,
in July 1998, found that the use of filtering software by libraries to
block access to constitutionally protected speech violates the Library
Bill of Rights. Though many librarians support the ALA position, others
argue that filtering is merely an extension of the library's right of
selection. The current panel will discuss the issue of filtering from the
perspective of librarians, free speech advocates, and software vendors.
Susan Getgood, Microsystems Software, Inc.
Robert Martin, Texas State Library and Archives Commission
Charles Harmon, Neal-Schuman Publishers, Inc.
~terry
Wed, Mar 4, 1998 (07:19)
#1
Danielle Gallo:
The Friday afternoon session featured a lively panel on library
filtering. Susan Getgood was the first speaker; she is a
representative for The Learning Company (http://www.cyberpatrol.com/),
the makers of Cyber Patrol filtering software. Getgood stated that the
makers of Cyber Patrol will not market to libraries but will
definitely sell to them. I accept this point as the Learning Company
is in a business that wants to make a profit along with helping
children surf safely. I think, though, that if librarians are going to
purchase the product they need to know what limits filtering
has. Charles Harmon presented the opposing view and argued that
filters are against the library's mission of providing access to
information. Harmon said, "the use of filtering software to block
sites is against ALA (American Library Association,
http://www.ala.org
amendments." Harmon stated that NO software will
ever meet the standard for libraries, and filters impose the
producer's viewpoint on the community. For criticism of Cyber Patrol,
see http://www.spectacle.org/cwp/ada-yoyo.html.
Many attendees lined
up to disagree with Susan Getgood during the question and answer
period. One attendee raised a good point in stating that many library
software users don't have a technical background, thus they are not
fully aware of how to use software products. Library users need to be
informed of how the technology works, its limitations, and how to use
it successfully. Finally, I felt Susan Getgood did an admirable job
defending her product despite the heated comments directed at her by
libertarians. She stated that she believes Cyber Patrol is a product
worth purchasing, and 68% of the parents in California who use
technology to monitor their children's surfing agree with her. And no,
they aren't going to publish the list of blocked sites.