When Dick Black was appointed to the library board in northern Virginia's Loudoun County three months ago, he thought he would just sit back for a while and learn the ropes. His resolution didn't last once a cause appeared: preventing Internet pornography from downloading onto the library system's computers.
With a little help from a neighbor, Dixie Sanner, who works for the conservative group Enough Is Enough, Black, of the town of Sugarland Run, convinced the board last week to install blocking software on its six computer terminals.
Sounds like politics as usual in rural communities which don't know the first thing about the Net, right? Wrong. Beyond installing blocking software, a step already taken by a handful of libraries and under consideration by many more, Loudoun County intends to do it in a way that meets Supreme Court guidelines that empower communities to dictate what is and what is not obscene, and thus liable to blocking.
"The stuff that is starting to travel on the Internet, it's sexual material that ordinary people would not even dream of in their wildest imaginations. It's really grisly stuff," said Black, an attorney who specializes in military law. "Let's face it: The reason for looking at porn is to become sexually aroused, and that shouldn't happen in libraries."
Several months ago, Loudoun County library director Doug Henderson presented a proposal to the eight-member board outlining why the library should not install blocking software. But Black, after hearing Henderson's plan for unfettered Net access, drafted an alternative proposal that would actively block pornography. His plan was approved by a 5-3 vote that followed several public hearings, software demos, and four hours of deliberations.
Black's plan orders library director Henderson to install filtering software that blocks only obscene material. Who decides what's offensive? Henderson says that the libraries will install software that implements the Supreme Court's 1973 Miller v. California obscenity test, which defines obscenity as something that has no redeeming social value, is patently offensive, and is sexual in nature. A key feature of the rule is that it is left to every community to decide what's obscene.
Under Loudoun's policy, library patrons who want to disable the software must get permission from the librarian, and must prove they have an educational or research reason for doing so. Patrons under age 17 can also disable the software with a librarian's permission, but they must have a parent or guardian present while surfing the Net.
"We don’t think that libraries should be in the business of blocking anything," says Chris Hansen, senior staff attorney of the American Civil Liberties Union. "That said, I think that this library board is starting with good instincts in that they only want to block obscene material. I just don't see how they are going to make it a reality based on the software out there today."
Henderson, who would not comment on the board's decision, said only that "The board reviews library policies every January, so they may change their minds."
But Black's neighbor, Dixie Sanner, doesn't think the board will change its mind. Sanner, whose Enough Is Enough group disapproves of the Supreme Court's June decision to strike down the Communication Decency Act, says filtering software exists that is nearly 100 percent accurate in blocking only obscene materials that meet the Miller standard of obscenity. Sanner has lobbied hard for the library to choose X-STOP, a blocking software program owned by Log-On Data Corp. of Anaheim, California, whose clients include Brigham Young and Pepperdine universities.
"This particular piece of software allows libraries to chose sites, just like they choose books for their shelves," Sanner says.
Well, not exactly. X-STOP blocks sites not based on words, like "breast," but on 43 criteria of obscenity based on the Miller test, which includes hard-core pornography, child pornography, and bestiality, said company CEO Michael Bradshaw. The program does not itself block soft porn like Playboy - but librarians can add sites to the blocked list. Bradshaw said his company is adding 266 hard-core porn sites to the list every day. The software blocks addresses, not host servers, as many blocking programs do.
"I personally believe that very few of the board members understand that they are blocking more than they realize," said Judith Krug, director of the American Library Association's office of intellectual freedom. The association does not support blocking software in libraries because they say the technology is imperfect. "Over time, I hope that library boards will become more knowledgeable as to the realities of software."
But Black disagrees. "The ALA is a very, very radical organization," he said. "It has a very sweet-sounding name but it is far more radical than the ACLU." He says communities should decide for themselves what material is available in public spaces.
"It should be a no-brainer," he said. "It's so obvious that pornography should not be in libraries. It doesn't have anything to do with censorship."
