Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Bomb Scare in Council Bluffs Library

Speaking of safe libraries, here is a bomb scare in the Council Bluffs Public Library, the one with the bad case of terminal cancer

Library Receives Bomb Threat

Published: Friday, March 19, 2010 11:12 AM CDT
A bomb scare disrupted the peaceful environment at the Council Bluffs Public Library Thursday.

At 6:45 p.m., library officials reported receiving a phone call from someone on a cell phone who said, “If there is a Joshua in the library, he has a bomb,” according to Council Bluffs Police Department records.  Every male in the building was identified, records stated.

The library was evacuated at about 7 o’clock, said Barbara Peterson, library director.  There “weren’t many” people in the building at the time, she said.  Police and library officials did a walk-thru of the building to check for suspicious devices.  Nothing was found.

Peterson was relieved that it was nothing more than a scare.

“It happens every once in a while different places, and I’m sorry it happened to us; but I’m just glad it was a good outcome,” she said.

By the time that was completed, it was about 8:30, so the library did not reopen, she said.

The library has caller ID, so library officials gave the number to police, who called the owner of the cell phone in for questioning.

The incident is still under investigation.

Reporter Tim Johnson can be reached at (712) 325-5750 or by e-mail at

Copyright © 2010 - Daily Nonpareil Online
Reprinted under Fair Use provision of the Copyright Act.


Tuesday, March 23, 2010 is Highly Recommended

People often ask me what Internet filtering software I recommend.  To answer that, highly recommended and brand new, from David Burt, an impeccable source, is, "The Independent Guide to Online Safety Technology":

Get Parental Controls provides parents with the tools they need for selecting parental control technology by providing accurate, comprehensive, and unbiased information about parental control technology.  Get Parental Controls is not affiliated with any company or organization, is run entirely by volunteer effort, and accepts no outside funding and no advertising.
I also recommend:
David Burt, well done.

Sunday, March 21, 2010

Yakima Public Library Allows Porn--Thanks to Legislative Policy?

The Yakima Public Library allows porn.  That is obvious from the news report and video in:  "It's Legal But Many Don't Approve of Watching Porn at the Library," by Ileana Diaz, KNDO 23, 19 March 2010.

"[I]t's legal to look up just about anything, which includes porn."   More "anything goes."

But look at the next sentence:  "It's a policy that legislators set...."  What?  Will someone please print that legislative policy in a comment to this blog post?

I am going to investigate this further.  Anyone in the area who wants to contact me, please do.  In the meantime, please see these stories from about 80 miles away:

As the library's motto says, "Yakima Valley Regional Library; Connecting People and Ideas...."  And porn.


Wednesday, March 17, 2010

Vote Sara Kelly Johns for ALA President to Support Intellectual Freedom

Vote Sara Kelly Johns for American Library Association [ALA] President. Why? Finally the ALA has a chance for a president interested in true intellectual freedom, instead of just making it appear that way.

If the ALA is lucky, President Sara Kelly Johns will make full use of the ALA's "Office for Intellectual Freedom," [OIF] which it is not, thanks to the ALA's former de facto four-decade leader, Judith Krug, who wanted the issue of jailed Cuban librarians to "drown" (the issue, that is, not the librarians) and considered the court-ordered destruction of six entire library collections, including the burning of a Martin Luther King, Jr. biography, to be a matter not worth mentioning on the OIF's web page entitled, "Book Burning in the 21st Century."  And the ALA is still ignoring Afro-Cuban civil rights.

I am hoping Sara Kelly Johns will reverse these disgraceful injustices, and many more.  She might unleash ALA's principles of intellectual freedom on behalf of those trying to exercise that human right in Cuba and elsewhere.

Check out Sara Kelly Johns—see how obvious it is that people love her:

Here is the information I have on which I base my decision to endorse Sara Kelly Johns:

[ifforum] ALA Candidates Speak on Cuban Library Issue, by Robert Kent, The Friends of Cuban Libraries, 16 March 2010 (graphic of Sara Kelly Johns added):

Press Release

The Friends of Cuban Libraries
March 16, 2010

Contact: Robert Kent                                                   For Immediate Publication
Tel. 718-305-9201
Website: http//

ALA Candidates Speak on Cuban Library Issue

Sara Kelly Johns and Molly Raphael, candidates for ALA president, spoke on March 8 at the office of New York City's METRO library organization.

Both candidates affirmed their respect for intellectual freedom as a core value of the ALA, but a specific question from the audience about the Cuban independent library issue identified their contrasting views on intellectual freedom as a matter of policy.

Critics of current ALA policy say that past ALA investigations and panel discussions on Cuba have overlooked or ignored the repression of Cuba's independent library movement, founded in 1998 to oppose censorship. According to journalists and human rights organizations, Cuba's independent library workers have been subjected to police raids, arrests, 20-year prison terms and the court-ordered burning of confiscated book collections. Amnesty International has named Cuba's jailed independent librarians as prisoners of conscience and is calling for their release.

In the only opinion poll of ALA members on the Cuba issue, conducted by AL Direct, 76% of respondents voted for the ALA to condemn the repression Cuba's independent library movement.

During the question period at the March 8 presidential candidates event in New York, a member of the Friends of Cuban Libraries complained that several ALA investigations and panel discussions of this issue had allowed only one side of the controversy to be fairly heard. The questioner asked Sara Kelly Johns and Molly Raphael to guarantee that, under their leadership, diverse views on the Cuban library controversy would be fairly represented in future ALA considerations of this issue.

Sara Kelly Johns responded to the question by noting that she has paid close attention to the Cuban library issue. She gave assurances that, under her leadership, diverse views on controversies would be heard within the ALA and that the Cuban library issue would not be permitted to "go under the table."
If brought to Council by a Council committee, the issue would be discussed.

In contrast, Molly Raphael said that the ALA has already established its Cuba policy on several occasions, and she stated it is not the role of the ALA president to challenge settled policies. With regard to the ongoing controversy over Cuba's independent libraries, she stated it is not a "yes or no question."

In contrast, the Friends of Cuban Libraries believe book burning is very much a "yes or no question."


Monday, March 15, 2010

Another Rape in Another Library Bathroom: Solon, OH

Another rape in another public library bathroom.  It keeps happening again and again.  I'm almost in tears for the victims of these crimes, most if not all occurring after porn viewing on library computers, most in libraries that refuse to use Internet filters because the American Library Association [ALA] directs them not to.  Adherence to ALA policy trumps local control, and local children suffer.

Philadelphia, PA.  Des Moines, IA.  Brooklyn, NY.  North Adams, MA.  Newark, NJ.  St. Paul, MN.  Etc.

Now Solon, OH.  In the Solon Public Library.  In the bathroom.  The "family restroom."  A teenage girl.  Raped.

  • "Solon: Police Investigate Teen Sex Incidents," by Jeff Maynor, WKYC-TV Cleveland News, 11 March 2010:  "One teenage girl says she was raped in the family restroom at the Solon Public Library.  ....  The library incident is reported as a rape with threat of force.  ....  At the library, they now keep the family restrooms locked."

And what a coincidence—the library adheres to ALA policy!  Then the library outright lies:  "The Library cannot control and is not responsible for the content o[f] the Internet."  Yes it can, with Internet filters such as those described in US v. ALA.  But I found no reference to filters whatsoever on the library's web site.  I do not believe they are being used, precisely due to adherence to ALA policy.

This looks like another case where the significance of library policy goes right over the heads of the media.  I cannot tell from the article if a lack of filters contributed in any way since there is no reporting on that topic one way or another.  I urge local police and media to investigate whether Internet usage was in any way involved in this matter.  The last time I recall making this suggestion I was proven correct.

"The user agrees to hold the Library harmless from any claims, losses, damages, obligations, or liabilities relating to the use of library computer...."  But the raped girl is not "the user" and her family will not "hold the Library harmless."  Quite the contrary.  If my advice is sought in this matter by the girl's family attorney, I will be happy to assist.


Saturday, March 13, 2010

Will ALA Silence Lead to Death?

A man on a hunger strike is dying.   The American Library Association [ALA] is in a position to help the man.  It is being asked to help.  Will it?

Here are the facts:

Here is one example of how the ALA has addressed the issue of Cuban librarians in the past:

For more of the disgrace that is the ALA's treatment of Cuban librarians, see my other blog posts at  I hope the ALA will act effectively now, but I doubt it.

Hurry, ALA, Guillermo Fariñas Hernández of the Dr. Roberto Avalos independent library in Santa Clara is dying.   Please help.   I have included above a picture of the man so you can look him in the face and see who your late de facto leader wished would have "drowned."  That leader is gone.  It's time to move on now and help Cuban librarians like you help other librarians worldwide, and perhaps more, given the mortal circumstances.

* From:
* To:,,,
* Subject: [ifforum] Hunger Strike Appeal: Librarian in Danger
* Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 14:56:41 EST

Dear colleagues:

Appended below is an urgent appeal to the ALA to help save the life of Guillermo Fariñas.  As noted below, the address of Mr. Rodríguez, the Cuban Foreign Minister, is: (  While awaiting a response from the ALA, we urge you on an indvidual basis to send messages to the Foreign Minister.  Your e-mail could be the one that makes the difference between life and death. Thank you - The Friends of Cuban Libraries

Subj: Appeal to ALA: Hunger Strike Librarian in Danger
Date: 3/11/2010 2:43:06 PM Eastern Standard Time


The Friends of Cuban Libraries
March 11, 2010

Dear Ms. Alire:

We write to you in your capacity as president of the American Library Association, asking for your urgent and compassionate aid in saving the life of a fellow library worker, Guillermo Fariñas.

Mr. Fariñas, the director of the Dr. Robert Avalos Library and the national coordinator of the largest group of independent libraries in Cuba, is on a hunger strike at his home in Santa Clara to win the release of 26 Cuban prisoners who are in poor health.

Mr. Fariñas has refused to consume food or fluids since he began his hunger strike on Feb. 24, following the hunger strike death of prisoner Orlando Zapata Tamayo.  Guillermo Fariñas is growing weaker, and Cuba's official newspaper "Granma" has indicated that the government will make no effort to save his life after his health declines to the point of unconsciousness.

Among the prisoners for whose health Guillermo Fariñas has gone on a hunger strike is Ricardo González, the director of the Jorge Mañach Library, and Ariel Sigler Amaya, who was condemned to a long prison term for, among other alleged crimes, gathering books for a library collection.  Both have been named prisoners of conscience by Amnesty International.

On an urgent basis, we ask you to please contact the Cuban Minister of Foreign Relations, Mr. Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla, to request that efforts be made to save the life of Guillermo Fariñas.  The e-mail address of the Foreign Ministry is: (

Today the Parliament of the European Union passed a resolution expressing concern for Mr. Fariñas, and we hope the American Library Association will rapidly join the worldwide effort to help in saving his life.

Sincerely yours,

Robert Kent

Co-chair, The Friends of Cuban Libraries
New York


Thursday, March 11, 2010

In Defense of Dionne Mack-Harvin; The Brooklyn Public Library Director's Resignation May Be for Laudable Reasons

Dionne Mack-Harvin is resigning as the director of the Brooklyn Public Library.  The media is all aflutter with speculation that she is resigning due to a gaffe that occurred last August.  But there may be another reason, and a laudable one at that.   She may not want to be a part of what may be a continuing conspiracy to commit fraud.

Media Reports Claim Old Flap as Reason for Resignation

These media reports claim the reason for the director's resignation is related to a matter from August 2009:

As I read those stories, I see no direct evidence that the August 2009 kerfuffle is the reason for the resignation.  Indeed, "Mack-Harvin insists that her resignation was a personal decision that had nothing to do with the downsizing scandal...."

Might there be something more recent that caused the director to jump?

Recent Criticism of the BPL and a Call for Production of Exculpatory Documents

Recently, I have disclosed what may be fraud perpetrated by the Brooklyn Public Library.  I called on the director to speak with me publicly and to produce copies of certifications filed with the federal government that would prove or disprove possible fraud. Please see:

Letter from the Brooklyn Borough President

In response to these blog posts and emails based thereon, I have received from the Brooklyn Borough President the following response:

On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 5:55 PM, [name, email elided] wrote:

To Mr. Kleinman:

The Borough President’s Office has received your issue concerning viewing pornography in Brooklyn Public Library.  In response to your concerns we have contacted the BPL and they have stated that they filter their computers, providing adults the choice to conduct their computer session filtered or unfiltered and children’s computers are automatically filtered.  Further, privacy screens are available for all customers and though the libraries are public spaces library staff is trained to manage customer services issues as they occur.  The BPL states that they ensure that children’s areas are separate from adult areas, and if a customer is viewing controversial material, that the customer use a privacy screen or move to a more secluded location.  Also, the BPL states that an independent audit, conducted two years ago by the international accounting firm KPMG on behalf of the Universal Services Access Corporation (USAC), the organization responsible for dispersing and overseeing E-Rate funds, found that BPL was in compliance with federal E-Rate requirements.

If you have any further questions please feel free to contact me at the number provided below.

[name elided]

[name elided]
Community Liaison
Brooklyn Borough President
Marty Markowitz
209 Joralemon Street
Brooklyn, NY 11201
Phone Number: [elided]
Fax Number:     [elided]

The Brooklyn Borough President has reacted to the resignation by lauding the director most graciously.  See:  "Brooklyn Public Library Chief Resigns," by Rich Calder, New York Post, 4 March 2010.

Conspiracy to Commit Fraud

What the above message from the Brooklyn Borough President tells me is that the library misled the President and KPMG, and there may be a conspiracy to commit fraud.  How else does one explain how the library survived the 2007 KMPG audit?  Had the library disclosed that it allows patrons to unfilter the computers for themselves?  There certainly would have been consequences vis-a-vis the E-rate funding received in the past and in the future.  Remember, as I disclosed on my other blog posts, what the library says in writing complies with the law, but differs from what the library allows in practice.

Evidence of Fraud Begins in 2004

Potential evidence of the perpetration of the fraud first appeared in 2004.  That was the first time it was publicly noted that the library may be skirting the relevant law:

By the way, the very means the library uses to defraud the government is the American Library Association's [ALA] recommended means, as discussed in one of my previous posts.  I predict that the ALA will not change its guidance/policy even if violations are eventually proven. 

Mack-Harvin May Have Resigned to Quit Fraudulent Practice

Everything on my blog is my opinion unless backed up with reliable sources.   It is possible that the director resigned to stop playing a role in defrauding the federal government, something that may have been ongoing since at least 2004 and that continues to this day.

It is possible she joined the library when the fraudulent activity was already well underway, and now that I have brought the matter to the public's attention, or now that she has considered what I have said and found it may be valid, she has had the integrity to resign from such an operation.

I could be totally wrong.   I think the August 2009 firings are too remote to cause a resignation now, seven months later and after the matter had quieted down.  And she said they didn't.  On the other hand, I think the Brooklyn Borough President's letter occurring just two weeks before the resignation and all the background that goes with it is coincidentally close, no?

Good Luck to Dionne Mack-Harvin

I wish the director well, no matter what the truth may ultimately be.  But if she resigned to avoid perpetrating a fraud, she will truly be a role model librarian/citizen.  As one commenter ("Concerned Librarian in Brooklyn") on the Library Journal article said:

In the big picture, she did well and is leaving us a better, stronger organization.  Our circulation is the highest it has ever been, many frontline staff are happier than with past administrations, we are more honest and more transparent.  At least for three years it was nice to have one of our own in charge and to see a young, accomplished, African American woman in charge of the fifth largest public library system in the world.  Now we are left to the mercy of the Board of Trustees:  a bunch of clueless, overly political, nasty, corrupt, individuals as only Brooklyn could create.

"Corrupt"!  Coincidence?

What do you think?  Please comment below.


Tuesday, March 2, 2010

The Anything Goes ALA is Out of the Mainstream by Defending the Right of Children to Access Pornography in Public Libraries

Why is there such a disconnect between our profession and everyone else on this particular issue?  More specifically, how could we have allowed ourselves to be put in such a publicly disadvantageous position as defending the right of children to access pornography?  The answer is simple and ironic.  Our profession preaches intellectual freedom but does not tolerate its practice within our own ranks.  Librarians imbued with common sense and good political judgment are afraid to espouse even a moderate position that advocates the limited use of filters.  There is a great fear within librarianship of being branded a censor.  No librarian wants to be wounded by that bullet.  That's why we can never really initiate an open and honest dialogue among ourselves on issues involving even the most obvious need for limitations of intellectual freedom.  As a result, the extremists always dominate, and we end up with an "anything goes" official policy that distances the library profession from mainstream America.

Will Manley said that.  I love you, Will Manley, for being one of the few to speak truth to power.  "Anything goes."  Exactly.  Please consider getting more of Will Manley's common sense at his new blog, "Will Unwound."

The above quote comes from "Intellectual Freedom Begins at Home," by Will Manley, Booklist, 1 October 2003.  You must read the entire article.  It points out that US v. ALA was a "major setback" for the American Library Association [ALA], that some librarians "personal[ly] attack[ed] the values of the justices themselves."  And they are in your communities telling you to sidestep US v. ALA.

Our profession's "anything goes" view of intellectual freedom simply does not square with the values of the communities we serve.  While librarians were blasting the Supreme Court as a band of censors, parents from Maine to California were thanking the justices for protecting their children from the excesses of sex on the Web.

Thank you, Will Manley.  Yes, this article is many years old, but nothing has changed within the ALA on this issue—rather it has only solidified.

Any community facing the ALA propaganda machine should consider this Will Manley article as a powerful antidote.  When you are labeled as a "censor" for attempting to legally protect children from inappropriate material, you are in good company with the "band of censors" in the US Supreme Court.

Here is the entire article reprinted under Copyright §107 Fair Use.  Ah, freedom of speech.  Enjoy!

by Will Manley
1 October 2003

Among the flurry of Supreme Court decisions that were handed down at the end of the last session in early July was a ruling that received critical reaction from many librarians.  The Supreme Court's decision upholding the right of the federal government to make the filtering of children's-room computers a requirement for libraries that receive federal monies was, in particular, a major setback to the American Library Association's Office of Intellectual Freedom.  ALA devoted a great deal of time and money to a vigorous legal battle challenging the right of the feds to mandate filtering.  At first blush, the Supreme Court decision would seem to be a setback in the crusade for the rights of access for millions of minors throughout America.  When it was first announced, the professional library reaction was both swift and negative.  Some referred to the decision as an "electronic book burning" others called it a grave act of censorship.  An ALA spokesperson predicted that many libraries would consider rejecting federal money rather than installing filters.

Some librarians were so upset that their criticism went beyond a point-by-point critique of the actual decision and elevated into a personal attack on the values of the justices themselves.  According to these librarians, this was one more example of the narrow-minded thinking of a court packed with ultra-right-wing appointees from the Reagan and Bush I eras.  They were quick to point out that these "fundamentalist" justices were the very same judges who stole the presidency from Al Gore and handed it to Bush II on a silver platter.  They overreached, however, when they asserted that in upholding the constitutionality of filtering the Internet, the Supreme Court was now validating Bush's conservative social agenda.  These critics had conveniently forgotten that the Children's Internet Protection Act had actually been promulgated by both the Clinton/Gore administration and a Democratic Senate.

It is perfectly legitimate to attack the Supreme Court decision on the basis of one's view of the First Amendment and how it applies to a library patron's right of access to pornography.  It is also appropriate to condemn the decision on the basis of the fact that some filters unintentionally block access to nonpornographic sites.  It is not, however, valid to criticize the decision on the grounds that the Rehnquist Supreme Court is dominated by conservative judges who are out of step with mainstream America.  Consider the other rulings that were released by this "conservative" court at the same time as the library-filtering decision.  Affirmative-action selection techniques were upheld in determining university enrollment, a California law aimed at bringing justice to child molesters was overturned, a death penalty was struck down because a defense attorney was deemed to be "ineffective," and a Texas sodomy law was ruled unconstitutional.  Are these the decisions of a conservative court?

The fact of the matter is that several of the justices appointed by Reagan and Bush have turned out to be liberal on a good many legal and societal issues.  As a result, the Supreme Court that we have now is one with a good deal of balance.  At times it's conservative, moderate, and even liberal.  In that regard, it reflects the variable moods of mainstream America.  It would appear that in the case of keeping children away from Internet pornography, it is the library profession, not the Supreme Court, which has distanced itself from the mainstream.

Our profession's "anything goes" view of intellectual freedom simply does not square with the values of the communities we serve.  While librarians were blasting the Supreme Court as a band of censors, parents from Maine to California were thanking the justices for protecting their children from the excesses of sex on the Web.  This is how one grandmother, who visits her public library twice a week with her grandchildren, explained it: "Sex is something that's like a gun; dangerous if you don't know how to use it.  I'm all for them putting restrictions in a public place."  Representative Istook of Oklahoma, one of the drafters of the Children's Internet Protection Act, said that the ruling "will mean libraries can continue to fulfill their mission because parents won't need to be reluctant about dropping off their kids for an afternoon at the library."

Journalists have traditionally joined hands with librarians in the cause of advocating intellectual freedom.  In this case, however, that support was not there for us.  The local newspaper that I read every day is quite liberal in its editorial point of view, but on the issue of filtering the Internet for children, its stand was clear and conservative:  "Children must have access to libraries and all that they provide.  At the same time, they require sensible protection from a cyberworld that knows no limits."  Our other local paper was even more forceful in its opposition to ALA's party line:  "These days librarians want to let it all hang out.  It's free speech all the way--which explains why the American Library Association is not happy with Monday's ruling by the US Supreme Court on the subject of Internet pornography.  Free speech, of course, is precious.  But as courts have noted over and over again, it cannot be completely unfettered.  And one fetter that almost everyone agrees is necessary is the one that keeps pornography out of children's hands."

Everyone, that is, but the library profession.  Why is there such a disconnect between our profession and everyone else on this particular issue?  More specifically, how could we have allowed ourselves to be put in such a publicly disadvantageous position as defending the right of children to access pornography?  The answer is simple and ironic.  Our profession preaches intellectual freedom but does not tolerate its practice within our own ranks.  Librarians imbued with common sense and good political judgment are afraid to espouse even a moderate position that advocates the limited use of filters.  There is a great fear within librarianship of being branded a censor.  No librarian wants to be wounded by that bullet.  That's why we can never really initiate an open and honest dialogue among ourselves on issues involving even the most obvious need for limitations of intellectual freedom.  As a result, the extremists always dominate, and we end up with an "anything goes" official policy that distances the library profession from mainstream America.

© American Library Association 2003


Will Manley has, all these years later, reaffirmed what he said in 2003.  See "3 Ways to Get Blackballed in the Library Profession," by Will Manley, Will Unwound, #428, 26 April 2011, emphasis added:

1)      Conservative politics….We all know that the library profession is extremely liberal in its political leanings.  To prove this all you have to do is look at the big name speakers at A.L.A. conferences.  How many conservatives have there been among this group in the past 40 years?  Maybe one or two at most.   Librarians would rather be validated than challenged when it comes to politics.  But it goes beyond that.  Many librarians think that conservatives are selfish, stupid, unsophisticated, and ultimately evil people.  Conservatism is not an alternative political viewpoint to the library profession; it is a curse.  The unfortunate issue here is that our many city councils, county boards, and state legislatures are ruled by conservative politicians.  These are the folks who hold our purse strings.  Isn’t it time to stop demonizing them and start dialoging with them?  Don’t even think about it if you want that big promotion.
2)      Organized religion….The library profession is very wary of organized religion, because religious morality is the banner that many book censors wave.  Many librarians disdain organized religion because they think it is repressive, judgmental, irrational, evangelical, and overly structured.  If you are a librarian it is okay to freely talk about your spiritual quest as long as you do not mention that you belong to an organized church.  It’s also very okay to be openly atheistic and agnostic because this shows you are a thinking person who has overcome an early childhood attachment to superstition.  If you have to be an avowed member of a formal religion, Buddhism seems to be your best bet.  Buddhism seems to be the cool religion right now.  Protestantism and Catholicism definitely are not.  If you are a member of a formal Christian Church keep that part of your life in the closet for the good of your career.
3)      Censorship Perhaps the most career limiting move that you could make in the library profession is to refuse to toe the line with the anything goes philosophy of the ALA Office of Intellectual Freedom.  I am still getting criticism heaped on me for a series of articles that I wrote in the 1990s advocating that filters be put on children’s room computers to block out pornography.  Really!  I’m pretty sure that the library profession is the only profession in the world that wants children to have access to pornography.  Why?  Because everyone is afraid of being called a censor.  It is the death nail in the career coffin.  The irony of all of this is that the library profession touts itself as the champion of intellectual freedom.  If that’s true why can’t we freely express our dissenting views of an "anything goes" philosophy of intellectual freedom…or conservative politics…or organized religion for that matter?


I consider this republication of Will Manley's work and my repeatedly linking to it to be a success since knowledge of Will Manley's views have apparently swayed decisions away from the anything goes ALA view and toward one that better reflects local community values and leads to filtering computers.  Here is a statement by Will Manley himself upon which I base my observation:
Dan, that is one of the articles that got me into trouble.  I still have librarians coming up to me very upset because their trustees saw that article and then voted for filtering.  So much for intellectual freedom.

by Will Manley April 27, 2011 at 1:28 am

Notice his comment, "So much for intellectual freedom."  As the Annoyed Librarian pointed out, librarians have the intellectual freedom to agree with the ALA's Office for Intellectual Freedom.  Will Manley's statement lends support to that.  This is one example why SafeLibraries's mission is "Educating people and politicians about who controls public libraries.  Citizens should, not the American Library Association."

In any case, this Will Manley view into the behind-the-scenes machinations of the ALA has successfully led library trustees to vote for Internet filtering.  Please consider sending this information to your own library trustees.