Librarian Strongly Supports Filtering Legislation; Notus Public Library Director Jo Ellen Ringer Tells It Like It Is

Notus Public Library Director Jo Ellen Ringer strongly supports filtering legislation and exposes that "[e]very librarian knows full well that non-filtered computers are used for pornographic purposes."  And, "Is porn information?  NO!"  Heresy!

In a comment to a recent post of mine she wrote:

J.Ringer said...

I am probably the only librarian in Idaho that totally supported the filtering legislation.  I made my legislators aware of my career and my backing of the bill.



Every librarian knows full well that non-filtered computers are used for pornographic purposes.  No one denies it.  I have yet to encounter the person who is doing breast cancer research, thus needs filter turned off.



Why should public tax dollars go to support porn addicts?  That is the bottom line, not freedom of information.  Is porn information?  NO!

I have seen men publicly masturbating while viewing porn on library computers.  When I reported this to my supervisor (at Nampa, ID library), I was told it was none of my business.  I wondered if it became "our" business if he sexually assaulted some child in the library bathroom after this viewing.

I expressed my views to the Idaho Library Association and was quite disappointed that they chose to fight filtering.  All filters can be turned off NOW for legitimate research.



Jo Ellen Ringer, Notus Public Library, Notus, ID

Thu Apr 07, 04:28:00 PM 2011

Brava Jo Ellen Ringer!  She now joins other librarians and library directors willing to speak out about the "dogma," like Dean Marney.  See, "Library Porn Removal Roadmap; NCRL Director Dean Marney Details How to Legally Remove Legal Porn from Public Library Computers and Advises that the ALA Relies on Outdated Dogma."  Or like Will Manley; see, "The Anything Goes ALA is Out of the Mainstream by Defending the Right of Children to Access Pornography in Public Libraries."

Maybe it is time that librarians and library directors rise up and speak out about what they know to be true.  I will make that happen as best I can.  For example, here's an open invitation to guest post on this SafeLibraries blog.  You are not alone.  The American Library Association's anthem need no longer be "Smut!" if enough people speak out.

And thank you, Jo Ellen Ringer, for commenting on my blog post and getting this ball rolling.

.

Court Rules No Porn in Library; Washington State Supreme Court Rules Public Library Internet Filters are Constitutional; Local Control Trumps ALA; ACLU Threats to Sue are Empty

The American Library Association [ALA] opposes public library Internet filtering despite losing big in US v. ALA.  It attempts to mislead local communities into choosing not to use legal and effective means to protect children.  Often library leadership and the media are ALA acolytes who care little for community concerns.  But the ALA has just experienced a dramatic crash for all the world to see and emulate.  Read on.

Library Director Opposes ALA Position and Proclaims Common Sense

The North Central Regional Library District in Washington state has a library director, Dean Marney, who has stood up to the ALA and its propaganda.  I wrote about him in the past.  See "Library Director Extols Internet Filtering;  Porn Should Be Excluded From Libraries; Dynamite Reading For Library Directors, Trustees and Patrons."  "He knocks the ALA's instigation of a lawsuit against the library—another example of the ALA attempting to usurp local control."  (As an aside, the ALA recently claimed I "dictate" to communities when it is obviously exactly the opposite.)

Now, having been proven correct by the Washington state Supreme Court in Bradburn vs. North Central Regional Library District, he says it all: "North Central Regional Library District director Dean Marney called the decision 'an affirmation for libraries, common sense, civility, and the appropriate use of public funds,'" emphasis mine.  See "Updated: Washington Supreme Court, 6-3, Backs Library System's Full Filtering Policy; No Disabling But Willingness to Unblock Sites; Case Still in Federal Court," by Norman Oder, Library Journal, 6 May 2010. 

Also see, "Washington State Supreme Court Opinion," by Dean Marney, NCRL News and Events, 6 May 2010:  "We are gratified to know that the highest Court in our State understands the context in which NCRL operates and the discretion we must exercise to perform our essential functions."

So the ALA's attempt to control yet another community has fallen flat on its face for all the world to see.  The ALA's propaganda machine has failed.  Its empty rhetoric is proven false.  Local communities need not fear the ALA or its local acolytes.

As I see it, it's Library Director/Local Control 1, ALA 0.

Media Opposes ALA Position; Exposes ACLU Threats to Sue as Empty

Even the media is not fooled.  Elizabeth Hovde, for example, is a columnist who has not and will not buy the ALA line.  She didn't in the past, see "Sensible Censorship: Surfing for Porn Shouldn't Be a Public Library Service" (where in the comments self-arrogated freedom of speech advocates attempted to remove her writing), and she's not now, see "Library Needn't Supply Pornography, Court Rules," by Elizabeth Hovde, The Oregonian, 7 May 2010.  I have reprinted it below to inspire all who think the ALA is some kind of authority on what goes on in local libraries.

I have highlighted below the particularly outstanding concepts rarely heard in the media.  Common sense, library filters are not censorship, it's all in there.  Get the digitalis, "Libraries aren't required to help people access pornography."  Can you believe it?  Might the ALA and your local library policy written or inspired by the ALA be wrong?

The ACLU gets put it its place as well.  "Some have been hesitant to deny patrons unfiltered Internet searches because of the ACLU's threat to sue."  I know this personally to be the case.  I've been told so by governmental leaders in communities nationwide.  It is time communities stop being fooled by empty ACLU law suit threats.

Further, if the ACLU does sue for things that have already been decided by the courts, then countersue for treble damages for vexatious litigation.  For example, in Nampa, ID, the ACLU threatened to sue because adults asking for books kept from children might be embarrassed.  The town caved in, but it should not have because the ACLU had already lost on that very issue of embarrassment five years previously in the US Supreme Court.

So that's Media 1, ALA/ACLU 0.

Your Library Director and Media Could Also Oppose the ALA

In your own communities do you have a library director who supports you instead of the ALA?  Does your media investigate and report accurately?  Is the ACLU (or the NCAC) threatening your community?  Let the above serve as an example for communities nationwide.  Go into your libraries and find out what are the policies and practices (they can be different), look at the laws that created your libraries, then act accordingly.  I will help if requested.

By the way, to head off at the pass the oft-repeated, false claim that filters do not work such as by blocking breast cancer searches, know that even the ACLU now admits filters are 95% effective and no longer block health-related searches, and the ACLU was a losing party in US v. ALA were it attempted to have the Court find filters to be unconstitutional in part claiming they were ineffective.  And filters may even prevent libraries from aiding and abetting pedophiles.

Libraries Nationwide Will Soon Have Improved Filtering Policies

As the Library Journal correctly predicts, the Washington case "may lead some libraries to adopt more stringent Internet filtering policies."  Anything is more stringent than "anything goes."

"The interest in protecting young library users from material inappropriate for minors is legitimate, and even compelling, as all Members of the Court appear to agree."  US v. ALA.

"We conclude that a library can, subject to the limitations set forth in this opinion, filter Internet access for all patrons, including adults, without violating article I, section 5 of the Washington State Constitution."  Bradburn vs. North Central Regional Library District.

Library Needn't Supply Pornography, Court Rules

By Elizabeth Hovde, Oregonian columnist

May 07, 2010, 11:00AM

Imagine that.  Libraries aren't required to help people access pornography or other controversial material on taxpayer-funded library computers.  Just as libraries pick and choose what books to put on the shelves, they can help guide what people view on public computers.

The Washington state Supreme Court delivered that dose of common sense this week, ruling that libraries that install filtering software on computers aren't required to turn the filters off at a patron's request.  While filters can limit people's Internet searches -- the reason the ACLU sued a library system in Wenatchee -- the ruling rightly recognizes that creating safe learning environments for patrons of all ages is more important than being a supplier of pornography or other controversial material.  And the ruling rebuts the ridiculous assertion that library Internet filters amount to censorship.  Pornography is widely available regardless of filtering software on public computers.  No one is stopping the presses.

The state Supreme Court ruling is great news for Washington state libraries and possibly those beyond the state's borders, as it could influence a pending federal case.  With the backing of courts, more libraries might adopt responsible library Internet policies.  Some have been hesitant to deny patrons unfiltered Internet searches because of the ACLU's threat to sue.

With so many incidents of inappropriate behavior or predation in libraries around the nation, including some in Washington and Oregon, this ruling is extremely good news.  Whatever communities can do to keep libraries as safe as possible for children and librarians, the better.

Read the Washington state Supreme Court opinion here.
The 28-branch North Central Regional Library system has a press release regarding the ruling available here.

Elizabeth Hovde writes a Sunday column and posts blog entries on The Stump throughout the week.  Reach her at ehovde@earthlink.net.

.

One Man Changed Library Policy And Explains How

One man changed his local library's policy at the Nampa Public Library in Nampa, Idaho, USA. SafeLibraries has asked this man to explain how he did it. While the change itself (regarding books) is not related to SafeLibraries' main interest (educating the public about Internet filters vis-a-vis the ALA), the method of effecting change is potentially very educational and should be interesting/useful to read. Here is his response:


On March 10, 2008, a huge victory was won for families in Nampa and throughout the state. The Nampa Library Board, in a 3-2 decision, decided to pull from the shelves two books that could be considered nothing less than hardcore pornography. The books, entitled "The New Joy of Sex" and "The Joy of Gay Sex," contained illustrations, pictures, and photographs that were so graphic even the 10:00 news could not show them in their newscast. So the question became: why then were they on the public library shelves, in a place that is supposed to be family friendly?
I first became aware of the books in December of 2005 when a friend of mine informed me of how her 14 year old son had found a copy of "The Joy of Gay Sex" sitting on a table at the Nampa Public Library. She then told me what she saw in the books--graphic, detailed illustrations of various homosexual sex acts. I thought at first that surely this was not as bad as she had made it seem--after all, kids run around the library, so surely they would not have anything of this sort sitting on the shelves, right? I decided to investigate further, and what I found was absolutely horrifying. As a parent, I was shocked to see these two books sitting on a shelf right next to books on racism and World War II!
Thus began the long, almost 2 year battle with The Nampa Public Library. The first time I went to the Library Board, I was informed that some people in our community need these reference books to "see how things go together." Surprisingly, in a 5-0 vote, they decided to keep the books on the shelf. So I took the next step--I went to the Mayor and City Council. I brought my concerns to their attention, gave them information (including photocopies of the pictures) of what was in the book, and put the ball in their court. They responded well, by requesting the Library hold a special Board meeting to discuss the issue.
This meeting was well attended by the public, as the basement of the Library was packed with people there to see what would happen. The Mayor’s office had been bombarded with phone calls and e-mails from people demanding the books be removed, thanks to the help of Generation Life and the Idaho Values Alliance helping to get the word out! The Mayor spoke, as well as a representative from City Council, both lending support and requesting the Library pull the books. However, we would be denied again, as the Library voted 4-1 to keep the books but move them to a higher shelf.
Some thought this was a good compromise, and have asked me why I did not agree. It is quite simple, really--because our concern was not just with the 4 and 5 year olds that might see these book--the teenagers as well. Studies have shown that exposure to pornography in the childhood and teenage years can be damaging to kids, effecting how they view sex, and how they view relationships in general, by giving them an unrealistic idea of what to expect. On top of that, pornography is very addicting, with some experts saying it is more addictive than heroine! Marriages and families have been torn apart because of pornography addiction. While it may be true that it seems like everywhere you look you find porn images, that does not excuse the Library from having it on its shelves--in reach of kids.
It is important to note that the whole basis of our complaint was not because of written content, but only because of the graphic, detailed illustrations, pictures, and photographs that littered the pages of these books. The word that is written takes a little bit of time to absorb--you do have to read it. However, in the case of these images--it only takes one brief look and it is branded in your mind.
After going to the Library Board twice, I was unsure how to proceed next. So I waited and prayed. After some time, I became aware that 2 new board members had been added to the Library Board. After some prayer, and being approached again by people in our community, I felt that it was time to try again. So on March 10, once again, there was a showdown about these books. There was much heated debate, as this time the meeting was open to public comment. People came out on both sides of the issue, and spoke passionately about their feelings. The main point of those in favor of keeping the books: censorship. After about 2 hours of public comment, the Library Board voted. This time, it was in our favor. A 3-2 vote took the books off the shelf--permanently--and into the director’s office. They are still available to be checked out, but they must be requested from the director. In the meantime, the Board will be examining the purchasing policies of the Library, and perhaps in the near future they will be completely removed from the Library.
It is important to note that this was not censorship--the government is not banning the book from the public. They are still available to anyone at private bookstores and online. The Library Board simply did what the Library does on a regular basis--select books for removal from the shelves. By doing so, they have taken steps to making the library a safe place for families again. And why shouldn’t it be? The Library, after all, is not an adult bookstore--it is publicly owned for people in our community of all ages to enjoy, without parents needing to worry what pornography their kids--or teenagers--might see.
The moral of the story is this: we as Americans, and as Christians, should stand up for what is morally right and best for the society as a whole. We can have victory, even when it looks like we are facing a giant! Remember, Paul encourages us to "take on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand." Paul never encourages us to sit or look the other way--so let’s stand for what is right!

Randy Jackson is the director of Youth For Revolution, a Christian Faith in action ministry. You can contact him by e-mailing randy@youth4revolution.com, visiting our website at www.youth4revolution.com, or by phone: (208) 514-5962.