Internet porn and kids: weaving through tangled web of interests

The Internet is messing with everybody: businesses trying to make money off of it, businesses trying to figure out how not to be killed by it, book publishers, record companies, newspapers, everybody.

Rules that have held for decades, or in some instances centuries, don't cut it in cyberspace.

The government has been trying to help us out on this one, but as many of you are fond of telling me, government intervention isn't necessarily a good thing.

In April the national Children's Internet Protection Act took effect, requiring libraries that use federal money for providing Internet access to install filtering software on their computers to block children's access to porn sites. It has put librarians, who have until next July to comply, at odds with the feds.

Two good intentions are butting heads. Should we shield children from pornography? Of course we should. Do we believe in freedom and personal responsibility? Sure we do.

So which is it going to be?

A friend of ours was just furious the other day. She'd gone to her neighborhood library to find a book for her grandson. She sat down to use a computer terminal and what was already on the screen shocked her: children having sex. She quickly closed that screen, but the one behind it showed pornographic photographs of teenagers.

She told the librarian she was concerned that a child might have sat at that workstation. The librarian was sympathetic, but said there was nothing he could do. "He said, 'This is freedom of information.' I said, 'This offends me.'"

I know you're a journalist, she said to me, you believe in the First Amendment and all that, but how would you feel if your 9-year-old saw this stuff in the library?

He's never in the library alone, I said. And if he saw something like that, he'd probably ask whichever parent was with him what it was and we'd explain it to him. ("Son, I don't know what that is. Go ask your Mom.")

Of course, there are lots of children who spend time at the library alone. Internet filters make sense for them. I like the policy some systems have of requiring parental permission for children who want to use unfiltered terminals.

The American Library Association and the American Civil Liberties Union have sued to overturn the federal screening requirement on the grounds that it is unconstitutional. I'd be disappointed if they didn't challenge the law. We need them to be champions of the First Amendment, but we also need some perspective.

Because libraries are deeply embedded with a First Amendment sensibility, they have, at their best, fought for the broadest inclusion. But as a practical matter, their job has always included selectivity. They make judgments about which books and other materials they will keep in their limited space.

The Internet upset that role. The Internet, while not boundless, is too vast to be policed or cataloged.

So what is the librarian's role? Is it simply to provide computers and access, or is there a need to play a more active role by defining what the library will offer through this new portal?

The Seattle Public Library is considering its options on how to protect the public's access to information while also allowing parents, and anyone else, a chance to avoid objectionable material.

Deborah L. Jacobs is the head of the Seattle Public Library. "When the Internet became a reality for public libraries, it became clear we were facing something different," she said. "Our traditional role has been to actively select and choose," she said, but with the Internet there is no choosing.

Four years ago, Jacobs chaired a national committee on the Internet and the First Amendment. One day she was working at home, cruising porn sites, when her son walked into the room. He was 15 then, but as strongly as she feels about allowing free access to any material out there, she says, "I screamed at him, 'Get out of here.'"

Still, she doesn't think the library as an institution should make that decision for all parents. She's right about that, but it should make sure that parents really have that choice.

Jacobs sent employees of the library system a memo in mid-July laying out various options for managing Internet access. The option that makes the most sense would use new software that allows any terminal to be filtered or unfiltered according to the status of a particular patron's access password. Children's status would require parental approval to get beyond the filter.

Any plan will require compromises and will leave loose ends. Social evolution won't catch up with technological evolution any time soon, but the one sure thing is that standing still won't get us where we want to be.

Jerry Large's column runs Sunday and Thursday. He can be reached at 206-464-3346 or jlarge@seattletimes.com.