Re: Congress and internet (long)

[Johnnie Frisbie <ksmarc@COOP.CRN.ORG>]

I am amazed at some of the angry and hostile responses to Richard's
original post.  I thought that at least if we disagreed with what he said
we could at least admit that he had several points that were valid.  I do
feel that we as information professionals have no computions about
selecting for our library and feel we are probably the best person to
decide what materials electronic or print meet the funtion of our media
centers in the best way possible.  I do allow students on the internet
but only with a signed policy.  A policy signed by parents and students.
I do not allow them to use the schools sign on and password.  If parents
want to supply access that is their decision.  I have internet in the
home and I would never allow my children (the oldest is 18) on it while I
am not at home.  My account and computer are password protected.
        I must admit that I am against the legislation to censor the net,
but not for the same reasons as most of you.  I use the net as an
alternative news source.  That makes me responsible for filtering and
dissecting the news that comes in.  I am afraid that congress wants to
censor the net and use pronogrophy as a scare tactic.  I am concerend
that their real intent may be to control a source of information and
news that they cannot manipulate.
        However, these coy remarks about everybodys idea of what is
offensive and what is not is somewhat silly.  There are some things that
I bet 99% of us could agree are totally unsuitable for kids.  I could
list them but I am sure you know what I mean.  I am not talking about
classical literature or pictures.  Ads for phone sex, pictures of all
tyes of sex  are not what I want my nine year old looking at.
Unfortunalty I don't have the answer, but I do know that jumping on
Richard with posts that have nothing construtive to say will not solve
the problem.  He has a point, a good point. Perhaps instead of censoring
the net we should make parents leaglly responsible for protecting access
to the net for all children under age eighteen.  Probably way to
difficult, but the responsiblity belongs to parents.  It is too bad far
too many of them want to abdicate it to the state.


Johnnie Frisbie
ksmarc@coop.crn.org