Previous by Date | Next by Date | Date Index
Previous by Thread | Next by Thread
| Thread Index
| LM_NET
Archive
| |
Colleagues: Now that Dr. Laura has been thoroughly denounced here, may I speak a word in her defense? I don't get to hear here much, since I'm at work when her show is on, but I have heard her show several times, and have visited her web site frequently. Like many of you, I don't always agree with her, but for the most part I find her answers to be quite acceptable. Given the fact that she can only hear one side of a question, obviously her answers will reflect that viewpoint. As I recall, the incident that started this whole discussion was a reference to the ALA "Ask Alice" site. One night last week, after my children were in bed, my wife and I visited that site. We both agreed that the site was completely unacceptable. I had been considering joining ALA, but after seeing that site, I'm not so sure that I want my hard-earned money going to support it. Perhaps if all of us, including the ALA, would take criticism as suggestions for improvement rather than attacks we would all be better off. "Ask Alice" is offensive to some people. That is a fact. What can be done about it? ALA can dismiss those who are offended as ignorant and keep the site as is. They can re-evaluate the site and remove what is offensive, keeping what is useful. They can drop the site entirely. Which choice shows the most professional attitude? We can talk about whether Dr. Laura and others are insisting on censorship, but we still are professionals and we are being paid to exercise professional judgement about what we have in our libraries. Even if we had unlimited funds, what librarian would put Playboy in a school library? Why should we allow the electronic equivilent? As far as the "how to make a bomb" sites, again, we wouldn't buy such a book. Why allow the internet sites? It seems to me that when our employers, the taxpayers, hire us, they expect us to do the jobs they ask us to do. Libraries are not supposed to be anarchist training grounds; rather, they are to be safe places for quiet study. If we, as professional librarians, are going to expect that parents come in with their children to supervise what they are learning in the library, it won't take long until those parents decide that professional librarians aren't needed. Is that what we want? I am involved in two hobbies that permit a great deal of individual freedom, with a bare minimum of regulation. What permits these hobbies to be so free is that there is a great deal of self-policing. Yes, there are those who think that "All is permitted except that which is specifically forbidden" means that anything goes. Those people are talked to by the rest of us, and if they don't mend their ways, eventually turned over to the proper authorities. We need to do more policing ourselves, asking "would I allow this in MY house?" Sorry this has gotten so long, but this has been bothering me for a long time. David Lininger, LMS Hickory County R-1 Schools Urbana, MO 65767 tss003@mail.connect.more.net =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-= All postings to LM_NET are protected under copyright law. To quit LM_NET (or set-reset NOMAIL or DIGEST), send email to: listserv@listserv.syr.edu In the message write EITHER: 1) SIGNOFF LM_NET 2) SET LM_NET NOMAIL or 3) SET LM_NET DIGEST 3) SET LM_NET MAIL * Please allow for confirmation from Listserv For LM_NET Help & Archives see: http://ericir.syr.edu/lm_net/ =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=