USUALLY THE BIGGEST debate at the weekly staff meeting in Seattle's downtown library is whether to put an "L" sticker for "little children" or an "E" sticker for "easy reading" on the picture books. However, this week's meeting involved a more trying decision. "What we need is more computers, not less access," said Chance Hunt, head of the children's department. "They offer a false sense of security," said Betsy Kluck-Kiel, a veteran library consultant. The staff members, crammed between boxes of glue, coloring paper, and crates of books on the third floor, were nervously discussing a new law that will force them into something antithetical to libraries--censorship. Pushed by Senator John McCain (R-AZ) and signed into law by President Clinton three weeks ago, Title 17 of the 2001 appropriations bill requires all public schools and libraries who want federal funding to censor what people see on the Internet.
By April, the downtown library, along with all other libraries and public schools, must install Internet filters on its computers to continue getting federal funds. Three categories of content must be blocked: child pornography, obscenity, and material "harmful to minors." To block the content the computers will use an Internet filter, a software program that automatically blocks certain websites by searching for targeted words or pictures. ["Access Denied," Pat Kearney, May 5, 2000.] The filters are controversial because they use key word searches, which often block legitimate websites like the American "Breast" Cancer Association or Super Bowl "XXX." Furthermore, the new law, which McCain's office packaged and sold as a last attempt to save the children, raises all sorts of First Amendment issues. What websites are harmful to minors? How is obscenity defined? Can adults be censored just because children are around? Even scarier, the new law lets a computer decide what is protected free speech and what is not--a determination that previously could only be made by the courts.
While many of Seattle's public schools already have the problematic Internet filters, local libraries were caught off guard by the demanding law. The new law forces librarians to make a tough decision: Agree to censorship and get the much-needed federal funds, or take a stand against censorship and lose the federal funds. It's a difficult call, especially for Washington libraries. Washington is one of three states in the country that do not get state funding. Despite the financial dilemma, some librarians, like Downtown Seattle Library Director Deborah Jacobs, are taking a strong stand.
Jacobs, 48, a 25-year library veteran with a stern gaze softened by her reading glasses, has been fighting censorship her whole career. She's won numerous civil liberties awards and helped defeat one of the first laws attempting to censor the Internet, the 1996 Communications Decency Act. Because of Jacobs' efforts, the downtown library has computers with and without filters, open to anyone, including kids. "The Internet is like the Wild West, but we need to be responsible and at least offer parents a choice," says Jacobs. That is the main problem Jacobs has with the new law--it takes away the ability for parents and their communities to decide for themselves what Internet material is appropriate. More important, says Jacobs, the law is forcing the same filter standards for children and adults, something she finds unacceptable. "The filters just block too much important information," she says, "and we all like to read different bibles."
Though Jacobs is passionately against censorship, she admits that refusing the federal money will be tough. When you look at how much money Jacobs might turn down, you can understand her quandary. Annually, the federal government grants close to $3 billion to libraries across the country. (All 22 Seattle libraries share $34 million from the city, and the downtown branch gets about $200,000 from the Feds.) That money helps pay for needed computer equipment and expensive Internet cable phone bills. The downtown library is lucky. It resides in a city that is doing well economically, and it has a host of supportive private donors. The downtown library has the luxury to consider not taking the money--some libraries are not so fortunate.
For example, the state library in Olympia, which funds many of the computer services for other libraries across the state, is totally dependent on federal money. "It will definitely affect us. We get about $2.75 million--that's pretty much the sum total we have to spend for all our computer services," says Washington state library director Nancy Zussy.
In the meantime, Jacobs and her staff, like most librarians, are nervously waiting to see what the courts decide about the new law (the National American Civil Liberties Union will file suit in a couple of weeks). In addition, Jacobs will be joining librarians from all over the country this week at an American Library Association conference in Washington, D.C. to strategize and discuss Internet filters and the impact of the new law.
