"Editorial: Libraries Versus Porn," by Editorial Board, News & Record, 19 November 2009, emphasis mine:
Still, the library keeps searching for a happier medium and may have found one. Called a "bandwidth shaper," the device essentially makes viewing porn much more difficult by slowing the flow of information from certain sources to the point that it becomes excruciating.
Like a filter, the bandwidth shaper can misread a valid source as Internet porn. Further, librarians tend to defend the First Amendment as fiercely as newspaper people.
But there have to be reasonable limits. The library rightly has promoted the bandwidth shaper from pilot project to standard procedure. The occasional burps in that technology are a small price to pay for family-friendly libraries.
Look at that! "Reasonable limits"! "Family-friendly libraries"! What a concept! Remember, the American Library Association's [ALA] former 40 year de facto leader said, regarding Playboy magazine available to children in the Oak Lawn Public Library, "I get very concerned when we start hearing people who want to convert this country into a safe place for children." "Parents who would tell their children not to read Playboy 'don't really care about their kids growing up and learning to think and explore.'" Hey Greensboro, the ALA is "very concerned" you want family friendly libraries!!!
Even better, it is a pleasure to see yet another editorial (example) that states common sense instead of spouting the usual misinformation.
Perhaps the Greensboro libraries are under local control instead of ALA control! May the citizens, the government, the library, and the media continue to work together to keep it that way.
For more on the bandwidth shaper, see my previous blog post, "Bandwidth Shaper Slows Porn in Greensboro Public Library; Parents Had Stopped Taking Kids to Library; Acceptable Use Policies Do Not Work; List of Articles on Getting Porn Out of Libraries."
.
Until you correct the way to (mis)quote Krug, I cannot take your posts seriously.
ReplyDeleteLocal_MLIS_Student:
ReplyDeleteKrug is accurately quoted. Further, each article contains substantially similar quotes beyond those I quoted. One of the quotes directly involved SafeLibraries.org and my former partner, so I know quite a bit about the story, and I quoted her accurately, or at least exactly how the media quoted her.
Krug was proud of what she said, and she said it again and again. I see no reason for you to attempt to hide what she said by besmirching me when she wants people to hear exactly what she said, exactly how she said it. That's why she said it.
Local_MLIS_Student, your comment above is of a personal nature and it does not address any issues raised. As the blog states when you left the comment, "Comments of a personal nature and linkspam may be removed." This is your final warning. Do not leave comments of a personal nature or I may remove them. People come here to be educated, not to hear irrelevant personal attacks.
Further comments containing claims that Krug has been misquoted may be removed. Honest people can she she has been quoted accurately. Honest researchers will find a virtual 40 year trail of substantially similar quotes. The current ALA Office for Intellectual Freedom also makes substantially similar comments in substantially similar cases. Hence, claims Krug has been misquoted are false to any honest observer and are only intended to deflect from the issues at hand.
Krug did not say "Parents who would tell their children not to read Playboy 'don't really care about their kids growing up and learning to think and explore.'"
ReplyDeleteAccording to your source, Krug said "don't really care about their kids growing up and learning to think and explore." The other part of your "quote" was the author of the article inserting a supposed context.
Do you see the difference?
And this isn't "personal", but rather an issue of fact directly related to the "issue at hand".
Just admit it, moron.
ReplyDelete