Internet filters do not belong in libraries

Internet filters are far from perfect. With filters, student trying to access information on gay rights is blocked and a woman trying to find out more about breast cancer will also be left frustrated. Public libraries are often used by the poor to access the Internet, and the ruling means that many will be left with no way to obtain valuable information they need.

San Mateo Librarian K.G. Ouye believes Internet filters are unnecessary and has long-believed there are better methods to make sure library users are not accessing inappropriate information on the Internet.

By having library staff walk through an open computer area, Ouye believes they can keep a watchful eye on users while establishing a strong working relationship with them. Ouye recognizes that filters give a false sense of security and that by having staff interact with users, inappropriate material is not accessed. It's the same for parenting. While filters may do the job when the parent is away, nothing takes the place of interaction and communication.

The San Mateo Library gets approximately $4 million in state and federal funding and none of that is earmarked for its Internet computers. It is likely the city can get away with not adding filters without its services or funding being interrupted. On July 7, the Library Board will decide if it wants to follow federal guidelines or ignore them.

We hope the board takes a stand and eschews the cumbersome filters and continues its current policy. Because the library does not receive federal funding for its computers, it is not risking the loss of any money. It would actually save money because it would not have to pay for the installation of the filters.

It would also allow its users to surf the Web untrammeled but under the watchful eye of the library staff. Until better filters are invented, they do not belong in a place where people go for information.

Libraries in San Mateo County are fortunate to be able to use the county-wide library Internet system which does not rely on federal funding. But it's a sad day when people in low-income areas that rely on federal funding do so with strings attached.

Granted, children should be protected from smut and the ruling allows for adults to ask that the filters be turned off. However, it is likely that many people with a legitimate need for unfiltered access may be too embarrassed to ask for the filter to be removed.

The ruling is another case of the government going too far. Responsible communities are finding their own ways of eliminating the chance that children will be mistakenly exposed to pornography. To threaten federal dollars to communities that rely on it is inappropriate and misguided. Local communities are lucky they do not rely on that funding. But we must also beware of increasing governmental control of the ways we seek information. It's a slippery slope.<