# How strict should libraries' filtering software be? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 19, 2006, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-strict-should-libraries-filtering-software-be/357430 "2006-05-19T17:43:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2006, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-strict-should-libraries-filtering-software-be/357430/21 "2006-05-22T04:56:56Z")
The weirdest one I’ve run into was blocking the webcomic[Scary Go Round](http://scarygoround.com). Why? Too scary? (Eventually, the filter changed, & I could read SGR at the library. But I missed a lot of it a couple of years ago, lacking a home computer.) The online hookup sites, though, seems like those could stay. I’m not sure if letting Joe Househusband meet his secret gay partners through a computer outside his house is socially helpful. Maybe the wife should know, I’m just sayin’. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2006, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-strict-should-libraries-filtering-software-be/357430/22 "2006-05-23T19:52:57Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > **BrainGlutton** , how is the banning done? A blacklist of known bad sites would seem to be something no one could object to (assuming the sites were clearly inappropriate) but impossible to maintain. Using keywords like breast bans a lot of sites of legitimate interest. Using lists compiled by others would seem to make you hostage to their choices. What options do you have? I asked another librarian who’s been here longer. He says the library system doesn’t make those decisions, it’s done by the software company – Websense: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Websense](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Websense) Websense official website: [Forcepoint | Data-First Cybersecurity](http://www.websense.com/global/en/) Websense-critical website: [http://peacefire.org/](http://peacefire.org/) (Which, interestingly, Websense blocks, giving the message, “The Websense category “Proxy Avoidance” is filtered.”) ---
**Author:** ![Autumn\_Almanac](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d26b3c/32.png) [@Autumn\_Almanac](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Autumn_Almanac)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2006, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-strict-should-libraries-filtering-software-be/357430/23 "2006-05-23T19:57:32Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > (Which, interestingly, Websense blocks, giving the message, “The Websense category “Proxy Avoidance” is filtered.”) Makes sense. Filtering software wouldn’t be much use if it didn’t block information about defeating filtering software. ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2006, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-strict-should-libraries-filtering-software-be/357430/24 "2006-05-23T20:18:04Z")
> [@Cliffy](#): > > This shouldn’t be a difficult question. Public libraries should not be in the position of being thought police. If the government chooses to provide library computer access for the edification of its citizens (as any smart jurisdiction does and must), it must do so without reservation; it’s not really a resource for the intelligent patron if you can only access the material the government wants you to see. Of course libraries should not censor the internet. > > It’s also not an actual problem. Plastic screen filters exist which prevent a bystander from seeing what’s on a monitor unless they’re sitting directly in front of the screen. This allows anyone to look at whatever they want without impinging on others’ rights to be free of material they or their parents find offensive and inappropriate. From what I’ve read, my local library uses these filters and has never received complaints despite the fact that patrons can, and occasionally do, choose to access pronography on library computers. > > –Cliffy You are right, for the most part, I don’t think it is much of a problem. But how about this…just to play devil’s advocate for a minute. I live in a suburb of 50,000 people, it just built a beautiful new library, and we also have 2 older branch libraries, one of which is undergoing renovation right now. I mention all this to demonstrate that there is no shortage of dedication to the local library, and it is very, very well funded. That all being said, there is still a limited # of internet-access computers, and there is often a wait to use them. Even though the usage of them is essentially free for the library, it is still a limited resource. Is it right for people who need to use them for some more “legitimate” reason, such as academic research, job searches, etc, to not have access to them because someone else is surfing porn? Even at our well-funded library, there is a limit to how much money & space can be allowed to go to internet access terminals. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2006, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-strict-should-libraries-filtering-software-be/357430/25 "2006-05-23T21:47:57Z")
> [@Sarahfeena](#): > > That all being said, there is still a limited # of internet-access computers, and there is often a wait to use them. Even though the usage of them is essentially free for the library, it is still a limited resource. Is it right for people who need to use them for some more “legitimate” reason, such as academic research, job searches, etc, to not have access to them because someone else is surfing porn? Even at our well-funded library, there is a limit to how much money & space can be allowed to go to internet access terminals. But if you start inquiring into and making value judgments among the reasons patrons want to use the computers, where do you stop? Should the science student or the jobseeker be put in line ahead of the patron who wants to look up _Star Trek_ trivia? ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2006, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-strict-should-libraries-filtering-software-be/357430/26 "2006-05-24T01:57:19Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > But if you start inquiring into and making value judgments among the reasons patrons want to use the computers, where do you stop? Should the science student or the jobseeker be put in line ahead of the patron who wants to look up _Star Trek_ trivia? Well, that’s a good question, and I am not sure what the answer is. I do know that _Star Trek_ trivia is a long way from porn…especially porn these days, which is a whole world away from our dads’ Playboy magazines. The degradation of women on some of these websites is truly appalling. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2006, 6:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-strict-should-libraries-filtering-software-be/357430/27 "2006-05-24T06:20:01Z")
Count me with those who would prefer no censorship whatsoever, with unlimited access to whatever part of the internet the patron wants to look at. As others have noted, complaining that “some people” might not want to look at porn or whatever is problematic, as there is barely a subject that one person or other doesn’t find offensive. Also, as people have noted, there are relatively easy ways to ensure that only the person operating the computer can see what’s on the screen. Obviously, the issue at the forefront of this debate is porn, although other topics enter the discussion also. I want to make it clear that, while i don’t think that people’s viewing of the internet should be restricted in any way, this does _not_ mean that i approve of some of the behavior that accompanies the viewing of porn in public libraries. Anyone found jerking off or otherwise acting inappropriately while viewing a library computer should be summarily ejected and told not to return, at a minimum. It may be that arrest for indecent exposure would also be warranted. Personally, i can’t think of any circumstances where i would be interested in viewing porn on a public computer, but apparently plenty of people don’t have such hang-ups. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2006, 6:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-strict-should-libraries-filtering-software-be/357430/28 "2006-05-24T06:44:12Z")
> [@Sarahfeena](#): > > The degradation of women on some of these websites is truly appalling. Oh, there are websites where men are degraded, if that floats your boat. > [@mhendo](#): > > Anyone found jerking off or otherwise acting inappropriately while viewing a library computer should be summarily ejected and told not to return, at a minimum. Seems like a perfectly sensible arrangment to me. I mean, eating, drinking, and loud talking aren’t allowed either and they can enforce that; why not “no playing with yourself” ? ---
**Author:** ![Least\_Original\_User\_Name\_Ever](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e480ec/32.png) [@Least\_Original\_User\_Name\_Ever](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Least_Original_User_Name_Ever)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2006, 5:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-strict-should-libraries-filtering-software-be/357430/29 "2006-05-25T05:15:35Z")
Porn is what you want it to be. Some are appalled at the sight of flesh, some are appalled at penetration, some are appalled with man-donkey relations. It’s in the eye of the beholder. The Internets are like Vegas. Any flaw you may have will be exposed and you’ll find out there are others with that flaw. If you visit Vegas with some money and have never gambled before, if you nevre knew you had a gambling problem, you may before you leave. Same applies for the 'net. What about the donkeys being degraded? Nobody stands up for the donkeys…you vicious anti-burroites. ---
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2006, 6:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-strict-should-libraries-filtering-software-be/357430/30 "2006-05-25T06:25:42Z")
> [@foolsguinea](#): > > The online hookup sites, though, seems like those could stay. I’m not sure if letting Joe Househusband meet his secret gay partners through a computer outside his house is socially helpful. Maybe the wife should know, I’m just sayin’. Should hotel clerks check couples’ last names upon check in and call home if they don’t match? And don’t denigrate the value of porn. Without porn, the libraries probably wouldn’t _have_ the Internet and it’d still be a curiousity for geeks at reasearch universities. I say buy the “you need to look at this straight on to see anything” screens, kick people out who are acting inappropriate, and feel glad that you are giving people freedoms in your very library that people in China, etc. don’t have. ---
**Author:** ![Martini\_Enfield](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/martini_enfield/32/11123_2.png) [@Martini\_Enfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martini_Enfield)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2006, 7:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-strict-should-libraries-filtering-software-be/357430/31 "2006-05-25T07:17:18Z")
> [@even sven](#): > > Should hotel clerks check couples’ last names upon check in and call home if they don’t match? > > And don’t denigrate the value of porn. Without porn, the libraries probably wouldn’t _have_ the Internet and it’d still be a curiousity for geeks at reasearch universities. > > I say buy the “you need to look at this straight on to see anything” screens, kick people out who are acting inappropriate, and feel glad that you are giving people freedoms in your very library that people in China, etc. don’t have. Totally agree 100%. If John (or Jane) Secretlygay wants to use an internet connection outside the house to arrange a meeting with their gay lover, than that’s no business of the libraries. I just can’t believe anyone would want to… y’know, whip off a quick one… in a public library :eek: As others have said, _everything_ is offensive to someone. It would cost money to install filtering software - which would invariably end up blocking a heap of non-inappropriate stuff as well. ---
**Author:** ![SkeptiJess](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ea666f/32.png) [@SkeptiJess](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SkeptiJess)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2006, 11:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-strict-should-libraries-filtering-software-be/357430/32 "2006-05-25T11:12:54Z")
I don’t think there should be any filtering software on public library internet access for the most part. The screen filters that **Cliffy** mentioned are an excellent idea, though. Personally, I don’t look at other people’s screen in the library (any more than I read their books over their shoulders), but if the screen filter prevents even one little old lady in tennis shoes from getting an eyeful of tittie and bugging the librarians about it, then I think it would be well worth the price. The other ‘problems’ people worry about with open internet access can be relieved with a few simple and obvious rules. Worried that porn surfers will hog the computers? Set time limits on interent usage when the library is busy. If I’m standing there waiting to use a computer it doesn’t matter to me if the person hogging it is surfing the SDMB, or surfing porn – I just want my turn. And, obviously, anyone who is jerking off in front of a screen full of porn needs to be stopped – as would somebody who is jerking off in front of a screen full of kittens. In neither case is the problem with the _porn_, it’s with the behavior of the library patron. My one caveat – I don’t object to porn filtering software on the computers in the children’s room. This is assuming that filtering software is better than it was when my kids were small. I never put a filter on our home computer because I never found one that didn’t also filter out stuff they legitimately needed. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-strict-should-libraries-filtering-software-be/357430.md?page=1)