Censorship in the Library

opinion.latimes.com/opinionla/20 … brary.html

I’m kind of interested with where people stand with respct to this issue.

I’m obviously in favor of censoring what the homeless (and anyone else) can access in the library simply because you have the potential for kids to see that kind of stuff when they’re just there to work on a school assignment, or get kids’ books, or whatever. Furthermore, if you were to allow any number of kids you did not know into your house, and proceed to look up Internet porn while in their presence (and they were to see the porn), I’m pretty sure you committed no less than three different offenses under Ohio law and would be a sex offender the rest of your life.

If you can’t do it at home, why should you be allowed to do it in the library?

Furthermore, given the graphic nature of many pornography sites, it could readily be considered less graphic and potentially offensive for an individual to just run around naked all the time. Of course, public nudity is a violation of the law, and in the wrong context (i.e. sexual, which of course looking up pornography is sexual in nature) could also get you on the sex offenders registry for the rest of your life, especially in the presence of children.

So, we can publicly look up any number of pornographic images or videos (provided the images or videos are not illegal in and of themselves), in the presence of children when no action even close to that has any chance whatsovever of being considered legal!?

What?

I guess one compromise would be if there was some kind of viewing screen setup that blocked anyone else except the actual user from seeing what’s on the computer screen I could…almost…kind of…I guess…live with that. That would certainly be better for people that wanted to access their bills or other financial information on-line in a more secure fashion, although, that probably shouldn’t ever be done publicly, either.

Topic moved to Social Sciences. It’s not really a current event, per se.

The general public or public space doesn’t really exist making all of this a mute point.

There is only dictatorial privatization anyways that already supports your position Pav.

A lot of libraries already support such positions.

If it makes you feel any better I download porn at the library and watch it else where.

i can look at porn at home

does that mean i can do it in the library?

i don’t think people should be masturbating in public

but we’re not gonna stop masturbating, and homeless are already in public

perhaps this is easier to said than done but

perhaps rather than fixing porn in libraries by the homeless, we actually fix the homelessness

but then again, i don’t really think censorship of porn is the answer either

You’re a good American.

Incorrect,

They can smack their cocks in a bathroom stall, can they not? I’m all for fixing homelessness, by the way!

You’re not censoring the porn, per se, just the venue.

If a library system has the money and the space, the simple solution is to separate the computers. No librarian will agree to censorship of any kind nor will they hand over patron records without a court order. The library where I worked had separate areas–mini libraries within the main building. The children’s library’s computers were filtered, and reserved for children only. If we saw an adult using them, we’d politely ask them to move upstairs to the general use computers.

A patron had to have a library card to use the adult computers–and, in order to get a library card, they’d have to present ‘proof’ of residency–a driver’s license and, say, a utility bill in their name sent to the same address as that on their driver’s license. They also had to sign up for the computer, which they could only use for an hour. Privacy screens were provided on request. Iow, everything was done to limit what could be limited under the law. But we still had to send chairs out to be cleaned.

And, yes, value judgements are still made, but they’re usually based on highest use (magazines, periodicals, newspapers, etc.,) rather than content. The chief librarian, after all, does have a budget for acquisitions and has to keep within those limits.

Then there are the parents some of whom know the difference between an adult graphic novel and a children’s graphic novel. I remember a little boy with his grandmother. The boy asked where the graphic novels were shelved–he was in the adult section of the library. I told him–but then I told his grandmother I felt she should monitor what her grandson chose, since the children’s graphic novels were kept downstairs. I was giving the responsible adult her own choice, but I was walking a very thin line.

I’m cool with that. That’s basically what I was getting at, even though my preference is still separate viewing screens. I’m sure that there are still some adults that could be offended, greatly, by certain things that could be accessed.

I’m not really cool with the hour limit, unless there’s someone else in line to use it, then it’s an hour or, “First on, first off,” whichever comes last. If there’s really nobody in there, I don’t see where it should matter.

Apparently no proof of residency is required at the library in question, because the article seems to reference homeless people. I don’t really see why homeless people shouldn’t be allowed Internet access, they have access to everything else in the library.

Of course.

I wouldn’t have said that to her. Parents have to be repsonsible for their own kids, but there should be some books flagged as 18+ (in absence of a school note) that way it is the parent actually checking out the book for the kid.

I’m not sure what you mean by ‘separate viewing screens.’ Put a desk-top in a semi-divided carrel and you may get other people around the screen, but that’s pretty much a give-away–especially if they’re men with their hands in their pockets!

As for time limits and residency requirements, we’re like one of the largest libraries in the US, as far as county libraries go, and the computers are always in heavy demand. On slow days, the time limit is waived, unless someone else wants to use one and they’re all busy. Residency is a side-issue. As a county library, we’re funded by county tax monies. Not every town within the county belongs to the system, because they can’t afford it. The people can use the library, but they can’t use the computers nor can they check out materials. Now, if you come from out of town and want to check your e-mail, you can get a temporary pass for the computer–but you can’t check out materials. That may be the difference between the two systems, one’s county and one’s city.

I wrestled with the last thing, obviously–I still remember the incident. I wouldn’t have said a thing, except the little boy was so intent on trying to convince his grandmother that he and a friend ‘came up here all the time,’ implying a parent had allowed them before. Our books are all separated and suitably marked–the adult graphic novels are further separated by a floor. Plus the grandmother was, herself, hesitant. So I said the children’s graphics and comics were down on the first floor. I figured it made up for the time a couple of 12-13 yr. old boys, having gone through all the back issues of Playboy, asked if we carried ‘stuff’ like The Hustler. I told them no, we didn’t. So, then they asked where they could get some of the ‘good stuff,’ and I said, I supposed they’d have to go on line for that. O:)

It’s all a matter of people judgement–with some impulse thrown in–gut feel, if you will. As I said, I walked a very thin line, but I wasn’t censoring in either incident.

That’s true, but public masturbation is still not legal. I mean, do you know how you have those things that look like large binoculars that you look through to see the old newspaper photos? Something like that, only with the computer.

You’re probably right in that being the difference. You certainly have to have a library card to check anything out, but you’re not checking out the computer, so all this proof of residency stuff…I think just a picture ID should be enough.

You have Playboy at a library???

That’s true.

And Playgirl! Just not ‘that other stuff.’

Most of our old newspapers are on microfilm and we have microfilm readers for that. A privacy screen for a computer is a screen that fits over the monitor. It’s black plastic with small holes that keep anyone out of a direct line of sight from viewing the screen. People use privacy screens when they want to keep bank accounts, credit card numbers, etc., out of public view. There are people without home computers who conduct business on public computers.

A ‘filtered’ computer is a computer with parental controls on it, only, in the case of a library (public) computer, the librarians take the place of parents in deciding what should be filtered out. Actually, the filtering programs do, the librarians decide which program to use and on what computers.

The idea of censorship is anathema to librarians and a lot of time is spent in training to recognize censorship. The thing to remember is that information is free to everyone, up to a point. A librarian won’t give law enforcement access to a patron’s personal records, unless the agency can ‘prove’ to a judge the information is necessary. Even then, the library will fight a court order because, so often, the agency really has no business knowing a patron’s personal records–computer or check out.

A lot of times, what a librarian must do can go against what they feel they would do, personally. But Library Science–now called Information Science–is a two year Master’s program, and it includes a lot of sensitivity training.

Are you familiar with the magazine POV? It’s a literary magazine also read by indy film and documentary makers. One issue had a cover that showed a bunch of naked men and women seated, looking up at the camera. I didn’t have the time to read any of the magazine–it was on the magazine rack, was all. A couple of days later, I noticed the cover had been ‘covered’ by a piece of plain paper with the title penned in. It turned out a page, who was particularly religious, objected to the cover and got permission from her supervisor to keep it from public view. Neither knew what the magazine was about and the adult magazines are displayed on the second floor–away from the children’s and teen magazines.

That, to me, is censorship–

Sorry to have taken so much time with this, but it’s kind of a touchy subject with me. Librarians are against censorship and will bend over backwards not to practice it in any way. Nor will they keep any materials away from the public, if at all possible.

Highly inappropriate, no offense.

Do you realize that, in the State of Ohio, if I intentionally put a Playboy magazine where a minor could access it I’d be guilty of no less than two crimes and would be a registered sex offender for my entire life?

I would make the screens mandatory.

That’s cool, there’s plenty of stuff besides porn that kids shouldn’t access.

For anyone to graduate a Master’s Program is very impressive. However, censorship is of great importance in ensuring an orderly society.

Why do they have to know what the magazine is about? Unless you need an I.D. to get to the second floor, that magazine shouldn’t even be in the library. It’s inappropriate. For me to show that magazine to a minor in Ohio…see above

It’s cool with me, we should actually have a Debate over the merits (or lack thereof) of censorship. I haven’t gone into quite the detail in this thread as you have, but I’d be willing to substantiate some of my positions in greater detail. Also, I think it is a touchy subject for both of us, so things could get interesting!

Ohio is a very frightening and oppressive place. I hope Obama will send in some troops to liberate it. I mean it’s like the middle ages or something.

Ohio sounds like a really scarey place!

So, let’s talk about censorship. Twice a year, in the library where I worked, we’d have displays of books that had been previously ‘banned’ in public libraries. There were books that had been originally banned from school and small muni libraries as a result of parental protest. Oftentimes, the parents hadn’t even read the books. One was Catcher in the Rye, one was a children’s book, I Planted a Seed. (I think that was the name of it.) Catch-22 was on the list along with all of D.H. Lawrence’s books. Now I really don’t know why the books were banned, but I remember the reason given for the children’s book. The little boy finds a seed and wants to plant it. He shows it to all the adults in his life, and for various reasons, they tell him not to plant it–“Don’t bother, it won’t grow.” All of their reasons were some form of that. But the little boy wants to see what will happen, so he digs a little hole and plants the seed. He waters it and tends to it. Pretty soon it sprouts into a pea vine. The little boy is overjoyed. Now the message in the story is multi-leveled–it can mean the joy of discovery, learning in a hands-on fashion. persistence in caring for something, etc.

It was banned because the boy “disobeyed his elders!”

Now, of course, there are children’s books about mixed marriages, divorce, same-sex couples, human reproduction, name it and it’ll probably be there in a good library. Why? because of the category. Categories are based on age range and reading levels. The children’s books are rated for age 6 and under, i.e., they’re books parents read to their children. Most of them are pre-reading picture books, but some of them are for the older semi-readers who are old enough to question their parents or care-givers about things they may experience in kindergarten and first grade. The parents don’t necessarily have to read those books to the kids, but they can use them to decide how best to frame their answers when their kids ask.

Going on to talk about children’s book. When a new book is published, the publisher rates it as a Picture Book, a Chapter or Easy Reader Book, a Middle Book, and/or a Teen book. This tells book shop owners how to sort and shelve the books. The librarians take the ratings and can further divide them. In our library, all the children’s books are separate from the adult books, although there will be some over-laps between Young Adult and Adult–some of Poe’s novels would fall into this category, for example. And there are a lot of good adult reads in the young adult section and vice-versa. The thing is the librarian cannot keep anyone with a library card from checking out whatever books s/he wants to check out. Period.

Rest easy Pav, current issues of Playboy and Playgirl are kept behind a librarian-staffed desk at the library where I worked. The reader has to ask for them. Most pubescent boys are intimidated by the desk–that’s why they ask for back issues. If they did ask for the current issue, the librarian would give it to them. (Or s/he could say someone else was already reading it, but that goes against the code.) The magazine rack shows the name and says that the current issue is kept at the Reference Desk. In a sense, that’s censorship–but not really.

What are your experiences with censorship in public libraries?

Because you can’t show porn to minors? That’s just downright oppressive and affects the quality of my life!

The thing about, The Catcher in the Rye, which happens to be one of my favorite novels, is that it was banned for being highy inappropriate. With that novel, you have tremendous profanity, underage drinking, consorting with prostitutes…or at least coming really close, which could be a main reason Salinger didn’t actually have him have sex with the prostitute. Could you imagine the bans, then? There was blasphemy, lying, teenage rebellion, and anyone who doesn’t understand the actual theme of the book (including people that have actually read it) is actually going to just ban it for what it is on its face.

Here’s the problem you’re going to have: People want a seperation of Church and State, but public schools are definitely a function of Government and libraries are often a function of Government. Further, most people don’t want Legislated Parenting, in other words, they don’t want the Government (or institutions thereof) trying to raise their kids or tell them what their kids should/should not read. They want to decide that.

Eventually, you have Fundamentalist Christian parents, or other parents of, “Strong moral,” (Read: Socially Conservative) values who say, “I don’t want my kids reading that crap.” The parent can tell this to the teacher, but you know what, the teacher says, “This book is what I am teaching right now. There are going to be tests about the plot and thematic elements of this book, if the child does not read the book, he/she will fail these tests.” I’ll grant you that, if the student is offered an alternative assignment, and allowed to be excused to study hall while discussion of the book is had, then everything is probably fine. That happened at the H.S. I attended, but not every teacher/school is willing to do that.

So, you have a school that’s basically saying, “Your kid reads this book or your kid fails the class.” You don’t want your kid to do either, so your only real alternative is to try to get the book banned, or send your kid to Catholic School, but not everyone can afford that…

Either way, you know the parents who say, “I don’t need the Government to tell me whether or not I can spank my kid,” well, they also say, “I don’t need the Government making my kids read books that I think are inappropriate.”

I really can’t explain that book being banned in libraries. Schools, I understand, and have presented my position, but not libraries. At a maximum, you could make a case for labelling it, “Adult Fiction.”

The positive thing about the book is it encourages thinking for yourself and the negative thing is it encorages thinking for yourself. It’s pretty much a Universal that parents want their kids to listen to them, so up to a certain age, you really do not want to exaggerate positive results that come specifically from not listening to your parents. Although, Jack and the Beanstalk is basically the same thing, except that kid was impulsve and did not follow directions very well, he didn’t really actively defy his Mom or anything.

Again, I see no reason to ban legitimate books in a library. If a parent doesn’t read something from a library before reading it to their kid or letting their kid read it, all you have is a lazy parent.

Well, other than the blanket statement that a librarian, “Can’t do it,” I’m going to need something better than that and actually ask why can a librarian not do it? Can there not be a further designation of, “Adult,” book to the extent of, “Mature Adult,” book where you’d need a note from the parent saying the kid can get any books he/she wants?

That’s not censorship. Do you realize that, if you are under 18, a gas station cannot sell you a Playboy, or any other location?

I can’t say that I have had any. They haven’t had Playboy or Playgirl, but to me, that’s a far goddamn cry from censorship. They’ve also been smaller libraries, so they don’t have the fundage to get every magazine known to man, either.

Pav, you hit the nail on the head when you said:

Some people don’t want any form of government telling them what to do–especially not when it comes to how to raise their children. And yet, if the government says to put your child in a car seat until s/he reaches a certain age or height, for safety reasons, don’t most parents comply? There are a lot of government imposed rules–“This toy contains small parts that could be dangerous to small children.” “This video game–or movie-- is rated…” , but these are warnings to parents to at least review why the toys, games, movies, books, etc. have been rated that way before they allow their children to have them.

I question whether or not the parents who got Catcher in the Rye banned from jr. high and high school libraries or curricula either read the book or really understood what their children were feeling. The book, after all, was published as an adult book. It was only later that it was taken on by adolescents as a cry for understanding. Is Holden’s age ever mentioned? It can be implied because he’s been expelled from his boarding school because of his grades. But the rest of the book is a quest, really an adult quest for childhood innocence. Holden, himself, doesn’t understand it all–he wants to save children from losing their innocence by catching them in the rye field before they fall over the edge–into what?–cynical adulthood?

Given this interpretation, I’d only teach the book in an advanced high school English Lit. class. But parents had it banned, for whatever reasons they gave, and it’s, unfortunately as a result, been given a Young Adult Classic classification in libraries.

I don’t deny parent power. I told my daughter she couldn’t go to the movie, Schindler’s List even though a friend of hers had seen it with her mother. The friend was a European Jew and the movie had a great deal of emotional meaning for her mother. At the time, I didn’t want my daughter to see the results of hatred–I was being a catcher in the rye. I was exercising my parent power.

We have the film on tape. Our daughter no longer wants to view it. That’s not because of anything I said, it’s because the only reason she wanted to see it in the first place was because an underaged friend had seen it.

A lot of times, this is how kid’s and adult’s minds work. People should know what they’re saying and why they’re saying it before they make judgements. Kids don’t have the experience needed and parents have prejudices–most of which are unfounded.

You’re absolutely right, and it’s more of a situational thing than anything. For instance, there are laws on the car seats, of course, but that’s just so you don’t have little kids flying through the front windshield and dying over a little rear-ender. I do, however, disagree with seatbelt laws for adults because those laws are bullshit. Adults should be allowed to be repsonsible for themselves from a standpoint of safety. If some adult gets rear-ended and flies through the front windshield and gets their head splattered all over the road because he/she was not wearing a seatbelt, that’s just Darwinism doing its job.

The toy label is a good example, except it doesn’t necessarily require parents not to let their kids play with those toys, it’s just an advisement. I have no problem with an advisement. I’m not sure whether a parent could get hit for neglect if a kid not supposed to play with the toy choked to death on it or not, it’d probably depend on the exact situation. I mean, if you were enough of an idiot as a parent to leave it in the hands of a six-month old, then maybe…

For one thing, I would suggest that at least some of them read it, and again, they may not have quite gotten the theme and just wanted it banned for what happens in the book on its face. Although, not everyone is going to get the theme. It’s not the most overt theme of any book ever written or anything. I believe that it was specifically mentioned that Holden Caulfield was in his Junior Year of High School, for what that’s worth.

You’ve pretty much got the theme spot on, except not just from cynical adulthood, but the actual stuff that happens to you when you’re an adult. The cliff is, of course, metaphorical, and represents a fall from the grace and innocence of being a child.

Again, that’s the thing about trying to teach such a book in public schools. You have to have an alternative to that assignment, as the school that I went to did. I don’t exactly recall what the alternative was, I asked the girl whose parents objected to,The Catcher in the Rye, and I think it was maybe Othello. I’m not 100% sure about that, though.

That’s the irony, the parents who don’t want their kids reading The Catcher in the Rye are being catchers in the rye.

Again, I’m sure that some of the parents that wanted it banned actually read it, just not necessarily finding (or, granted, even caring about) the thematic elements.

There are parents who’re catchers in the rye because they’re the ones who know–or should know–how their children would probably react to certain realities. In the case of films, those realities are very graphic. But the thread is about censorship in the library and I just don’t see that happening, except in school libraries as the result of parental censorship. That could mean anything from the number of times the word ‘nigger’ is used. (Mark Twain’s The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn) to the use of ‘dirty language’ (Catch-22) Incidentally, Catch-22 also came under fire because Joseph Heller was homosexual! Wha?

Fortunately, most of the parental book-banning came during the 1950s-60s. Parents didn’t realize how much they’d become like the former and then current oppressive governments of the time. And what about the poor teachers charged with teaching ‘classic’ literature. Sure, they can go back to 19th century (or earlier) English classics, but how many kids will even understand the language of Dickens, George Eliot, the Bronte sisters, etc. It can be a real dilemma.

As for current safety laws and recommendations in the US–I agree they can seem excessive. Then I think of the number of lives that have been saved, or the fewer number of people living on life support or going through intensive physical therapy or faced with reconstructive surgery or faced with a life-time of the results of brain damage, and I’m kind of glad seat-belts, air bags, and helmets are around.

Specifically, the thread was about Internet censorship in the library. To the extent that it has become general censorship, I don’t necessarily believe that anything should be censored in a public library. If you guys want to stock Anal Penetration Monthly (Probably no such thing) in your Adult section, far be it from me to say you can’t. I just advocate for the adult section to be, “Adults-Only,” or maybe even a seperate, “Mature Audiences,” section.

You know, seperating audiences is not censorship, in my book. If a seven-year old asks you for an issue of Playboy at the reference desk, do you give it to him just because he has a card?

There’s no dilemna, in my opinion. Take a look at this list:

goodreads.com/list/show/6.Be … th_Century

That list is the, “Best,” books of the 20th Century. 3,753 of them. You don’t have to read, TCITR or anything that was ever banned. We did a summary of The Great Gatsby in H.S., you know, TCITR is one of my favorite books for plot, but thematically and constructively, it’s garbage compared to Gatsby, in my opinion. Gatsby says more about an actual era in America than TCITR. Gatsby is as much historical as it is a novel. I think it’s just incredible, we should have done a summary on TCITR. The theme doesn’t persist throughout in Catcher, there are maybe ten pages that actually deal with the theme in anyway.

You know what I think? I think that people doing stupid shit increases the cost of medicine and health insurance, therefore, the people that do stupid shit affect the people that do not in negative ways. In my opinion, you have safety regulations (as far as it concerns yourself, individually, not your children) and you may choose to abide or not abide. If you choose not to abide, and you can’t pay for your treatment out-of-pocket, you’re fucked. You go flying through thw windshield because you weren’t wearing a belt, why should the insurance company have to pay for that?

I didn’t disagree with the existence of seatbelts, I’m glad to have it and wear it. I disagree with legally codifying their use.

We can both go on giving links to sites listing books considered Classics and books considered ‘offensive’ by various groups–usually not librarians. But I think you have an underlying political agenda. which I’d love to discuss.

Technically, yes. In reality, no.

In reality, there’s no censorship of the internet within a library. There are parental filters in place on chldrens’ computers. But there are no such restraints on general use (adult) computers. So the general use, adult, computers should be–and, in the library where I worked, were–separated. And, as I’ve said, there are further, very legal, restrictions–as well as legal ways of getting around those restrictions, if one wants to do so. But why?

You seem to be comparing a library with a book store–they’re two different things. A book store needs to make money in order to survive, so it separates books according to publisher ratings, titles. and authors. How often have I heard, Where are your Martha Stewart books?

That can depend on the subject of the book, within the library sorting system. There are more than one sorting systems.

Nor do I, and I’ve tried to show that censorship within a library isn’t the norm. We can do everything legal to keep adult subjects out of the reach of children, but information of any sort is still free, to all, last time I looked.

WHAT!?

Because I don’t want a seven year-old to theoretically see a bound-and-gagged woman getting fucked by a cucumber wielded by a three-hundred pound man wearing a crotchless bunny costume, because that’s what gets some homeless dude’s rocks off I might have an underlying political agenda?

I don’t mean to come off as sarcastic, but I don’t think there’s anything political about my initial position. I was just saying there are plenty of, “Classics,” that can be taught. I don’t buy the line that the Catcher in the Rye must be taught. I do think Gatsby is better, if I had to choose one I’d take Gatsby, I’d teach both, if you want to know the truth! I would just give parents an alternative if they felt the book is not appropriate for the student.

Well, there, you’re seperating audiences.

I want screens on all of them, that’s all I’m saying. I don’t care what they look up, I just don’t want kids to be able to see it. Kids can roam the library freely, they can freely walk around the adult computers, just because they can’t use one doesn’t mean they can’t see what’s on it. You put the computers in a seperate windowless room, and that’s even fine, because I don’t care what other adults see. You’re an adult, you know other people in the library can look up I-Porn, you’re offended by the thought, don’t use the computer at a library. There’s a conscious decision to expose yourself, potentially, to that as an adult.

A book store also cannot provide Playboy to a minor!!! Otherwise, I am not comparing the two, no. Most bookstores, to the extent that I have experienced bookstores, do not have public computers. Oh yeah, bookstores also have a tendency of kicking out people that appear to be homeless, are not buying anything, and are looking up porn on the premises.

I say let the library allow the homeless to porn away, as long as kids can’t see it. That was the compromise at the end of my OP.

Can you do everything legal? Yes. Are you? Apparently not. You could wall and door an entire section of the library, no windows, give it it’s own staff member if it is big enough. You must be 18+ to enter this room, OR be accompanied by a parent/legal guardian.