After 18 Months, San Jose Council Says No to Internet Filters
Norman Oder -- Library Journal, 4/22/2009
- Issue comes down to cost
- Newspaper editorializes against filters
- Plan would have been similar to CIPA
Though much of an 18-month debate over Internet filters at the San Jose Public Library, CA, concerned the appropriateness and effectiveness of filtering, the issue, as decided by the City Council Tuesday, came down to money.
Given the current fiscal crisis, filter opponents on the Council said they’d rather spend money elsewhere, according to the San Jose Mercury News, and instead, 7-3, passed a policy that requires users to agree to use computers responsibly and follow library rules, and reminds them of the illegality of exposing minors to harmful material
The Mercury News editorialized against the filter plan, suggesting that “Filters in libraries still are a solution in search of a serious problem. At a minimum, the decision should be part of the overall budget debate, not considered in isolation Tuesday… But if the filters will cost the job of even one librarian or clerk, they're not worth it at this point.” The Council rejected filters in a 1997 vote.
The newspaper reported that Director Jane Light said it would cost $90,000 to install filters in children's areas, while filtering advocates offered to contribute $40,000. A 2008 memo from Light identified the cost at $96,000, plus $44,000 in staff costs.
Filter plan
Council member Pete Constant, who has said he wanted to protect kids from “secondhand porn,” gained support from the Values Advocacy Council ("A Voice for Christian Values").
On Tuesday, he got three votes, including that of Mayor Chuck Reed, in support of a plan based on that in Santa Clara County and not that different from libraries following the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA): terminals used by minors would be filtered, adults would have the option to turn a filter off, and all Internet users would be required to agree to use the Internet in a responsible and courteous manner.
Before making changes at the main library, which is a joint-use library with San Jose State University, library staff would work with the university to develop a policy.
Filter conclusions
“The conclusion staff reached from both the literature and its testing was that filtering technology for public libraries continues to be quite effective in blocking pornographic websites using keyword searches with 85% or more accuracy, and less effective in blocking images that are contained in email attachments or sites that are not primarily pornographic in nature,” Light wrote in the 2008 memo. “It is possible for a determined computer user to view some sexually explicit sites on filtered computers, but it takes more effort and computer savvy than on an unfiltered computer.”
“A second conclusion reached from the published reports and staff’s testing is that some overblocking of content that is not of an adult sexual nature occurs with any filtering technology,” the report continued. “The most likely subject areas to experience this over-blocking are, not surprisingly, related to sexuality, sexual health, and sexual identity.”
