Comments on: Libraries and Porn Privacy

By: Dani

Dani — Tue, 10 May 2011 23:41:06 +0000

#12 Andria

AMEN!

This whole topic really creeps me out. I started working in public libraries when I was 15, and my manager would tell us shelvers that we didn’t have to shelve in the areas where we knew patrons were watching porn. The first time it happened I asked him why couldn’t he just ask the man to leave, but as far as managers go, he was pretty useless and didn’t do anything. Ten years later, it’s still happening at all the branches in my system. And a very similar thing (to the issue at BPL) happened last year at my branch with a man masturbating to gay porn, and allegedly, he smiled at the man next to him, which prompted a beat down.

By: Infobib » Library Porn

Infobib » Library Porn — Fri, 06 May 2011 19:34:58 +0000

[...] zur aktuellen Debatte über “Library Porn” in den [...]

By: JimBob

JimBob — Thu, 05 May 2011 22:22:31 +0000

The truth is most erotica is also immoral, so the library is already trying to play both sides of the fence. A natural result of dealing in immorality is MORE immorality. Welcome to the modern “liberated” world.

By: Paige

Paige — Mon, 02 May 2011 18:36:37 +0000

Again–fornicating in the library is much more serious than someone simply watching porn.

By: Bruce Campbell

Bruce Campbell — Mon, 02 May 2011 13:26:39 +0000

Librarians are tremendous wimps/doormats when it comes to recidivists porn-watchers. Part of it has to do with the library being staffed mainly by women and the porn people are creepy men, who I (a man) don’t feel completely comfortable approaching.

Just a few weeks ago a couple was caught fornicating in my library, the special archives room. I wasn’t there, but we are able to identify the culprit. I pushed for banishing them from the library, but administration thought it would be a bad idea. We’re only as strong as our weakest link, people. And most school administrators are pro-student, anti-standards/rules of conduct.

By: FinallyaLibrarian

FinallyaLibrarian — Sun, 01 May 2011 13:49:42 +0000

The branches I have worked (public libraries) this has not been a big issue. But, it can be addressed VERY simply. Most libraries have policies where patrons can be asked to change behavior or leave if they are causing a disruption of the library’s environment or other patrons. I think the real problem is the average library administration’s lack of guts in having repeat offenders banned from entering the building. I just don’t get it, if you act up at any other government facility you would be arrested, but WE have to put up with cell phone yaking, latte slurping, flip flop slappin’, old buddy reunions, material theiving all day long. Porn addicts should be the FIRST to get banned. ANY LIBRARIAN who thinks otherwise is an over educated idiot.

By: annoyedlibraryworker

annoyedlibraryworker — Sat, 30 Apr 2011 02:45:45 +0000

@D
well said!

By: D

Fri, 29 Apr 2011 22:39:18 +0000

I think that Olly is correct about the internet not being central to our purpose. The library’s mission is specific and educational; it exists to promote reading and learning. Sending and receiving email, socially networking, and interacting with each other in other ways on the internet are peripheral to the traditional function of libraries. When the internet adversely affects that role, as it does when people consume pornography in public educational settings, we need to control it or get rid of it. Free Wi-Fi is unlikely to save us, but can hinder us from accomplishing our mission.
The slippery slope argument is a logical fallacy, an old first amendment fundamentalist saw. For the rest of us, life is complicated and nuanced, where our desire for freedom comes into conflict with our impulse to civilize and order ourselves. We librarians can do a better job balancing our support of the first amendment with accomplishing our mission. Our mission is not to provide access to every piece of information indiscriminately. Our mission is to gather and connect people with the best and most useful knowledge we’ve created. If pornography is harmful to children, if it creates a hostile workplace for library employees, and if it damages our ability to promote reading and learning, we are foolish to allow it to interfere with our important work.

By: britney spears

britney spears — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 18:13:15 +0000

@ olly

Now, I am not an expert on self-destruction, but I think that it’s possible you’re really gunning for a cliff.

I know places that had books in them and didn’t offer WiFi or internet access. They were called independent bookstores and the last one in my area closed its doors last December.

By: olly

olly — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 14:54:08 +0000

I have no illusions: providing access to computers is a massive part of contemporary public library service. What I’m suggesting is that it is *in fact* peripheral to our primary mission–promoting reading and literacy. The majority of users access these computers to fulfill quotidian tasks (send an email, check facebook, apply for a job). While the these tasks (and a free public means to accomplish them) are important, they have nothing to do with librarianship.

Andrew Abbot (1988) wrote that professions claim “jurisdictions” over particular tasks, and can lose that jurisdiction to other professions for various reasons (e.g. early psychiatry took over warehousing the insane from jailers, then diagnosing unusual mental disorders from neurologists). I am saying libraries ought to lose jurisdiction of public internet access to an institution that exists only for that–an internet cafe. We should still of course offer access to the internet, but hopefully the majority of people would be redirected to this cafe.

Door count numbers would suffer–but the only people who care about that are state bureaucrats and (necessarily) obsequious directors desperate to “prove their relevance.” Hopefully we’ll soon be past this phase of having to prove quantitatively that libraries are useful.