Internet Use and Filtering Survey

Recently, the reference staff was asked to share its opinions regarding internet use and filtering. Below are my responses:


1) In terms of our library, how many customer requests have we had for intervention in the case of someone viewing objectionable material via our computers on the public floor--how many in the past month have you handled? How many in the past year? Any general observations?

I do not recall any requests for staff intervention regarding objectionable internet content within the past month. Since we’ve introduced our new system for handling internet registration, patrons may be more circumspect in their internet viewing choices—they may think that (incorrectly) their usage may be tracked via their card numbers.

While I do remember instances of requested staff intervention occurring here in the past, I cannot positively place them within the past year. There have been rare instances of young patrons looking at sites they shouldn’t view, or of someone opening an inappropriate site and walking away from the computer, leaving objectionable material on the screen.

Before the institution of our new sign-up system, it was more frequent that patrons would complain about others (especially young people) playing games or chatting on the internet, or that others were spending too much time on the terminals.

In summary, I have not noticed a major problem with patrons using our internet terminals to view inappropriate material.


2) What are your general observations and yes, opinions, about Internet filtering in our library?

In general, I don’t think filtering is necessary at WNPL. There doesn’t seem to be much of a problem with inappropriate usage. I’m also concerned about filters offering patrons a false sense of security regarding their internet use. There is much material (for example, hate speech) that is available on the internet that is not blocked by filtering software.

Another consideration is what is meant by “inappropriate material”. In the class I teach at CLC, I share the results of a study of public library filtering in Indiana. Students are often surprised to learn that pornography isn’t the only kind of material that may be restricted. Some libraries restrict e-mail and/or chat; some even prevent catalog ordering on library computers. Filtering could also be used to block access to gambling sites or even to time-wasting online games. Filtering puts the library in the (I think inappropriate) position of being the “nanny” that decides for patrons what is good or bad for them.

Sometimes one hears of proposals to prevent access to MySpace, the popular social networking site, in order to protect teenagers from 1) misusing the site to harm others (“cyberbullying”) and 2) being stalked by online predators. I think teens are better served by being taught proper MySpace usage than eliminating access to it.


MySpace is only the best known of the social networking sites; if it is banned, another site would take its place. Also, preventing access to MySpace would give the network the fascination of the forbidden.

Social networking sites are here to stay, and they do provide their users with an outlet for self-expression. Patrons need to learn how to use such sites safely and responsibly. A better approach than restricting or banning access would be for the public library to offer online safety instruction for both parents and teens.

3) What have been your experiences in working at other libraries (if applicable) with or without Internet filtering?

The only library I have worked at that has used filters was the Lake Forest Library. This was several years ago, and filtering technology was not as advanced as it is today. At that time, the filtering software often crashed the computers or blocked inoffensive sites that patrons wanted to see.

Do Wikis Make Good Intranets?

Even thought there are lots of different meetings at Internet Librarian Conference, there always seems to be just a few themes that emerge. At the Oct. 2006 conference, one of the major points was that libraries should use wiki software to manage their intranets. Why? Because "wikis" are cool, and because wiki software allows for "radical collaboration" and "radical trust" (two other themes of the conference). The organizers of IL, however, tend to go with assertion over argument. Is wiki software really the best way to revitalize an intranet?

Zoli Erdos thinks so, at least for "smaller, nimble, less hierchical businesses." In his blog post "Wikis are the Instant Intranet", he points out that most large corporate intranets offer "one-way" communication only--from the top to the bottom. Getting new content into the intranet is often a daunting experience. Wiki software eliminates the middleman and allows contributors to add content whenever necessary, without having to go through channels. Large organizations wouldn't want to have only a wiki as an intranet, but any organization, Erdos argues, can benefit by adding a wiki as "a lively collaborative addition" (parentheses in original) to a larger internal website. Erdos does, however warn against using the "geeky-funny" term wiki. He advises the more neutral term "editable Intranet".

Other writers on the topic warn to beware of the wiki hype. Back in 2005 Toby Ward wrote in his Intranet Blog:

[Let's] not confuse a social communications tool with a business ecosystem ... But a wiki is a tool, and only a tool. For professional communicators and business managers, it is but only one tool that should be considered in a larger mix of options.

(empahsis mine)

In 2006, Shiv Singh was even more specific about the pitfalls of thinking that wiki software opens up the fast track to intranet development. In "The Truth about Enterprise Wikis," he wrote:

The first [truth] is that not every knowledge worker wants to collaborate. Putting an edit button on a page doesn't mean your knowledge workers are going to jump at the opportunity to share their thoughts for free. Enterprise wikis succeed in companies that truly reward collaboration. There aren't many companies like that.

Secondly, enterprise wikis only work when people feel secure in editing someone else's work. . . . Before encouraging your knowledge workers to use a wiki, make sure you have a trusted, secure office culture first.

And, it could be added, the collaborative Internet model will only work when people feel secure in subjecting their own writing to someone else's editing.

Singh suggests (and I agree) that it is a good idea to start an intranet-wiki off as a team or department based project, rather than immediately setting it up as an organization-wide affair.

Social Computing and the Information Professional

Despite the title, Elizabeth Lane Lawley's closing keynote presentation, entitled "Social Computing and the Information Professional," was really about her newfound interest in gaming, and how librarians can learn from gamers.

Games are a form of play with rules and structure. Usually, but not always, players have a goal to work towards, and often, the first person who reaches the goal "wins" the game.

Lawley said that people learn and remember best when they are are engaged by a game. Gaming is a powerful way of building emotional connection between people and/or between people and a place.

Not all games involve computers. Lawley gave the example of a "reverse scavenger hunt." In this game, players collect any 10 items they want. Then, they get the list of the functions these items are supposed to serve. The players must explain to the game's judges how a given item of the ten they gathered fulfills a purpose on the list. this involves a lot of "out of the box" thinking, improvosation and creative use of the items.

Other games played out in the real world include "Cruel 2B Kind" (in which member of one team "kill" members of opposing teams by, for example, giving out complements to all),and "Tombstone Hold 'Em" which involves playing "poker" in a graveyard using the tombstones as "cards".

Gaming has caught on in the academic world. Lawley thinks that current interest in gaming gives librarians an opportunity to think about the role of gaming in informal learning.

How can libraries take advantage of the power of gaming? I don't think she really answered this question. Libraries can sponsor games such as those mentioned above, or come up with their own library-based games to create a bond between users and the library.

What's Hot In Social Software

Library commentator Steven Cohen offered this A-Z look at social software trends. He did not use every letter. I will leave out a few items he mentioned that are not really noteworthy, but involve his family or personal concerns:

• A is for Ajax: Asynchronous JavaScript and XML, is a web development tool that allows for the development of social software.
  
• B is for Beta (as in beta testing) and for Browster an Internet Explorer plugin that creates an instant preview window for web sites.
  
• D is for Digg: This social technology-focused news site features "stories [that] are chosen by community members rather than editors" via vote.
  
• E is for Econsultant: A big online list of links for web developers.
  
• F is for Flickr: Very popular photo sharing site.
  
• G is for Gmail: Google's e-mail service. Also offers a chat component.
  
• H is for Hype: All these "social web" sites subject to a great deal of hype. They won't survive without a viable business plan.
  
• I is for Image Editors: A number of options are available for digital camera owners who want to edit their pictures. Resiz (sic) is free software that resizes your pictures before you upload them.. Other options include Pixenate (http://pxn8.com/), ResizeR (http://www.resiz-lord-lance.com), and SnipShop (I was unable to find this on the web).
  
• L is for Library Thing: Allows users to catalog their home collections and find out if others out there own the same books.
  
• M is for Meebo. Web based chat service.
  and Media Convert, which "convert(s) sound, text and video files).
  
• N is for Netvibes: Provides pre-defined blog feeds.
  
• O is for OCLC.
  
• P is for Pandora: Allows you to create your own music station and Parevideo, a metasearch engine for online videos.
  
• R is for RSS.
  
• S is for Snapper. Firefox extension that "allows users to designate an area of a web page for a focused snapshot, cutting out the additional work needed for cropping unnecessary information." Slideshare ""a place to share slideshows".
  
• X is for Xanga: Another social networking site
  
• Y is for YouTube: Video sharing site.
  
• Z is for Zoho: a "virtual office" site with online word processing, spreadsheets and presentation software.
  

Online Tutorials

Well-known web expert Greg Notess lead this evaluation of various online tutorials. He is writing a book on the topic, and it seemed like he was using the audience for generating ideas for his writing.

TILT (Texas Information Literacy Tutorial) is an award-winning web site that is often held up as a prime example of a tutorial. It features well-chosen graphics and sounds, a clear explanation of objectives, it loads quickly, a easy-to-follow navigation structure, and good explanations of library jargon. Libraries in Texas and elsewhere adapt TILT for their own use subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the TILT Open Publication License.