(Enokson)
There is much discussion in the Seattle area today after a mom claims that while on a visit to her local library with her two young daughters, she spied a man viewing hardcore porn on a computer with a screen that was facing out to the rest of the library. And when she complained about it to the staff, she says her concerns were shrugged off.
From the letter sent to area bloggers by the mom:
I noticed that a man was watching hard core pornography (including anal penetration & other adult content) on a computer where the screen was facing out into the library. I told the librarian and asked for help in having him move to a more discreet location. She could see the screen from the information desk where we were standing and was sympathetic, but said that the library doesn’t censor content and they can’t be in the business of monitoring what their patrons are doing at any given computer. I then asked the man to please move to another computer. He declined. In the process of this interaction, I didn’t notice that my daughters had wandered over looking for me and one of them saw what was playing on the screen.
The mom says she’s all for the man’s right to look at whatever he wants to but feels there should be some consideration to “our right not to be inadvertent viewers.”
A rep for the Seattle Public Libraries confirmed the institution’s stance on the topic.
“We’re a library, so we facilitate access to constitutionally protected information,” the rep explains to SeattlePI.com. “We don’t tell people what they can view and check out … Filters compromise freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment. We’re not in the business of censoring information.”
The rep did say the library is working with the mom to figure out a possible solution — like reconfiguring certain sections of the building so that little children would not be inadvertently exposed to depictions of sodomy and other stuff they should learn about from magazines they swipe from their parents.
Seattle library lets man watch porn, despite complaint [SeattlePI.com]
More From Consumerist
-
San Francisco Library Providing Helpful Privacy Screens For Online Porn-Viewing Comfort
-
Book Returned To New York Public Library Almost 55 Years Overdue
-
Not Done With That ‘Oregon Trail’ CD-ROM? Phoenix Library Could Use The $4.3M In Late Fees
-
Man Booted From New York Public Library For Excessive B.O. Wants $5.5 Million
-
Whew: Study Reveals The Internet Generation Still Knows What A Book Is
If that creep could access porn on the library’s computer, then kids probably could too, right? I’m about as anti-censorship as anyone can get, but the library needs to either set up a special adults-only area where the pervs can perv out, or else install filters to block adult content. People should be able to take their kids to a public library with the reasonable expectation that they will not be exposed to pornographic material while simply walking through the library. Kids are innocent, they don’t need to be exposed to things like anal penetration. Ugh.
And can I add- GROSS!!! Normal people wait till they’re alone to watch porn, it takes a real sicko to go to the freaking LIBRARY and watch hardcore porn out in the damn open in front of everyone. I honestly would call the police if I ever saw someone doing that. I’m no prude but it skeeves me out to the max to think about some exhibitionist freak getting his jollies knowing that other people can see his porn. Ew, ew, ew. People that do that kind of thing definitely do it on purpose. I had a guy come into my computer shop once & ask for help backing up his pictures. He then opened up his pictures folder to reveal nothing but hardcore porn. It wasn’t too hard to figure out that he showed them to ME, a female, on purpose either. Both I and the other female that works here now have strict orders from the boss to let him or the manager deal with this guy from now on, because he’s a sexual deviant. Yuck.
Not sure about this particular library but at the county library in my area, the computers do block out explicit sexual material. The computers in the children’s section have more restrictive filters. And parents have to sign a permission form to allow their children to use the computers – they are also supposed to indicate whether the account should has the more restrictive filters, or just the general one (that is, if the child was using a regular/general computer, not in the children’s section).
I don’t understand why you would be watching porn at all in a library, but at least show common courtesy. Looking at violent or graphic photos would be equally bad. If you want to look at something that is likely to be disturbing to the average person then find some place that has a limited view to the rest of the patrons.
I still think people that do stuff like this do so just to be dicks. Back when smoking was still allowed in restaurants my wife and I were sitting at the bar waiting for a table to open up. This trashy looking woman was sitting next to us, puffing away on a cigarette. My wife said to me, in a relatively low voice, that the smoke in the room was starting to get to her. Literally 10 seconds later the b*tch next to her pushed her ashtray closer to my wife, and and started holding her cigarette over top of it, so that the smoke was drifting right at my wife. Luckily a table opened just at that moment, as I was about to shove that ash tray down that woman’s throat.
If you are watching Porn in a library and a kid sees you watching it, would that be considored showing pornography to a minor? Would the library be complicit in this, as they were aware of the situation but did nothing to stop it?
This is screwed up. How on earth is that okay. What is Wrong with people. I dont care about the constitution in this situation…do you think Jefferson would have been Okay with someone thumbing through dirty drawings infront of a child? No. Its called decorum, and manners. They can kick out homeless people from a library because they smell, but lets protect the perverts. I would have raised HOLY hell, and gotten up in that guys face and made a scene, and god help me if the police came, I would have had the porn man arrested for showing my daughter porn. Ridiculous.
How can the library not have a policy about this? I’m positive that my library does. Come on, do they really want people jacking off in their publicly used chairs?
Yes the Library should let any person surf any legal site. However anyone breaking any public indecency laws or exposing minors to obscene material (this would include any advertising, political, or religious proselytizing content) should be prosecuted as anyone else would in similar circumstances.
So you can surf porn legally on a library website but you’re still subject to the same laws that would apply to someone masturbating on the subway while reading Newt Gingrich campaign pamphlet.
This is why this issue is BS. Clearly if no one know that someone is surfing porn its not an issue. So its not using the library computer to surf porn that is the issue. The issue is violating public indecency laws (whether or not you agree with them isn’t the point. What matters is they’re on the books) and those laws already exist.
THANK you!
Your tax dollars at work.
Remember this next time there’s a hue & cry about how libraries will have to be shut down without funding increases. I like the idea of what a library should be, but extremist anti-censorship positions like this one make the places downright creepy these days. I wouldn’t touch a library computer if my life depended on it. I have nothing against a person looking at porn in private, but I hate to fund public institutions that allow homeless people to view porn in the open and don’t see anything wrong with it.
Put some of the computers in cubicle type spaces, then enable porn blockers on the open screens and disab le them o nthe walled off ones.
My library has privacy screens. Those little stick-on, lenticular monitor covers that make it very difficult to see what’s on the screen unless you’re fairly close and DIRECTLY behind the computer. Seems effective enough.
Crazy how so many commentators are against watching porn in the library considering the large amount of support for another ‘in public’ hot button topic around here. Not the same but pretty damn related.
If the act being depicted would not be legal to perform in person in front of a child, then I see no problem with asking people not to show a filmed performance of it in front of a child.
We have an open policy of sorts…I mean we have filters in place but people get around them or there a new site that hasn’t been put on the block list.
If we don’t see it and we get no complaints, people are free to watch what they please. But if that mother had come up to one of our staff, the person would’ve been asked to stop watching the material or leave the library.
First off, I’m all for the consumption of anything by responsible adults in private settings, let it swing man.. but…
I don’t understand this idea that public libraries are responsible for serving up any information that exists to patrons. Growing up it was always my understanding that they exist to house literature, reference and educational materials. It’s great that they have added CDs, DVDs, more mainstream magazines, etc., to try to stay relevant to customers, but no where does it say they need to provide adult material, specifically pr0n on disc, magazine, or in internet. If I as parent brought little kids to my home and allowed them to watch pr0n, I’d be arrested. A library is a public place and subject to the same decency laws as any other. My suggestion – install cameras that monitor the users and computers, put in a policy that says if you view adult material on these, the police will be called and you will be arrested for indecency. I’m sure the viewing would be halted voluntarily by the offending patrons, certainly after the first one was arrested.
^^ I like it! After all, individuals have no expectation of privacy in public places, so taping them shouldn’t be a problem. Post a sign stating public decency laws will be strictly enforced. Remove the free speech/censorship b.s. from the argument altogether.
The opportunists won’t risk it and the deliberate pervs will be arrested. Seems like a pretty tidy solution.
I shouldn’t be paying my tax money for others to look at porn in the first place. Buy your own and look at it in the privacy of your own home, if you must.
I would think that most libraries would have an “acceptable use” policy that has to be signed either when getting a library card or before they are allowed to computers to access the internet. I work at a public college and it is in the rules of attending the college that you must agree to the acceptable use policy to use computer resources.
If someone complains to a staff member that a student is viewing pornography, security is called and they get talked to at the very least. We don’t use any kind of filtering software since that blocks too many legitimate sites.
I wonder how the library would have reacted if he took “it” out.
Nothing amuses me more than watching the puritans in this country get bent all out of shape.
Sex is a bodily function. It is no different than eating. I assure you that your ten year old child already knows about the various sex acts; it’s nothing you don’t learn from the other kids in elementary school.
The most ironic thing is that parents teach their children that lying is bad yet lie to them on a daily basis.
Hang some hardcore porn photos up on your walls at work. Let us know how that works out for you.
I work at a privately owned business. There is a difference. Private owners can set whatever rules they like.
So, by the Library’s logic, I can watch porn at work and not get in trouble? Cool.
Well first off, most workplaces are privately owned. A private owner can set whatever policies they want.
As for public-sector jobs, your job is to work so unless you are a porn star (giving the rapid expansion of the welfare state, government provided porn isn’t too far off) you would be in violation of rules that say you have to work and not do things that aren’t work.
And all of the lawsuits won by plaintiffs stating that porn and inappropriate sexual language in the workplace makes a hostile work environment? Legal precedent is not on your side.
Ohhh they are going to get in trouble. This has already been hashed out before. Yes the library doesn’t have to filter BUT it also has a reasonable responsibility to protect minors from certain content.
It’s a win for the mom if she sues the city.
I wonder if a USB drive stored in his undergarments? The library should also enact a “no portable storage accepted from undergarments” policy.
You know, for the kids.
Showing porn to children? I didn’t see anywhere in the article that he was calling kids over to “check this out”. He was minding his own business.
She should have expressed he right to free speach by hitting the idiot in the head with a chair.
This came up in the Minneapolis public libraries and the biggest problem was that the employees complained of being in a hostile work environement. I agree.
Sorry, but I can’t hang pornographic pictures up in my cubicle even if I face them so no one can see.
Filtering software was installed. If someone had a real reason to go to a blocked site they could just make a request to have the software disabled. Problem solved.
Even then a librarian would have a valid complaint if they didn’t have the proper training to safely clean up any potential biohazards afterwards.
The only question I have is what would be considered “porn” – what the complainant said definitely is, but you know there’s going to be some prissy-pants conservative who would call a PG movie “inappropriate”.
These are small people who finally have an issue on which they can feel superior. The fact that they are promoting an activity that is dangerous to you and especially your children. You can be assured that hard core pron watchers have a better internet connection at home than the one at the library. They do this because it excites them. The act of watching porn with others, hopefully females, watching at the same time gives them a thrill running up their leg. (Sorry Chris, I couldn’t resist). The danger comes from the allowance of these perverts to interact with young children and perhaps create a fixation between the perv and the children. As a Dad I didn’t allow my children, even as teenagers, to go to the video store that carried porn. Thel ast thing I wanted was some creature grasping the latest in salacious entertainment standing behind my daughter and injecting her image in his prurient dreams. There was one that didn’t in our town and they got all of our business.
Folks, the point is that libraries exist specifically to house information to be provided to citizens. Books, movies, etc. must be purchased, so there will always be a filter only due to cost. If someone, say, donated a bazillion dollars and said “This is to buy everything commercially printed this year”, the library would say “Okie doke thanks for your support” and do it.
The internet provides terabytes of content, including things some might find “obscene” for free. In a reversal of the usual order, it actually costs the library to block access to things. Why would that be compatible with an organization that was specifically instituted to provide information?
What’s porn, vs. say http://supersexycpr.com/ ? Once you go down the road of saying what people are allowed to see, you go down the same road that gets Huck Finn (which incidentally is in public domain, and therefore available on the internets) banned. Yes, it contains language we consider offensive, possibly as offensive as some see porn, but there’s merits to it, aren’t there?
Here’s another example, keeping in mind that this man wasn’t in the kids section and broke not a single rule, say this dude was looking up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Throat_(film) . Intrigued at this movie that broke into the mainstream, he wanted to look online for clips, bearing in mind there was no sound and he wasn’t in a kids area. Suddenly this woman’s behind him, complaining at him. He tells her to eff off, she storms off in a huff. Who’s wrong? The man, for following all the rules as posted? The woman, for trying to force her version of morality on him? The library, for allowing him to research something that was a huge cultural phenomenon in the 70s?
Many of us on here would argue that it’s the woman who is in the wrong. That her view of what is or is not an acceptable research topic is not his or the library’s problem.
So, any of you remember the old video stores, where they had an “Adults only” section, which was curtained off, roped off, set back from the rest of the videos? And if the managers caught anyone appearing under age going in there, you got kicked out? Why is this not an answer to the problem? You have to check an “I’m over 18″ box, if you intend on taking your “research” past that point, you should be moved to a computer that is not near the main foot traffic of the place. You aren’t denying access, you aren’t censoring anything (from people that are of legal age to see it), what’s the problem?