Council Library Filter Vote an Unsatisfactory Conclusion

Last night, the City Council voted to require filters at computers operated by minors in the Greensboro Public Libraries.  The News and Record reports that the "bandwidth shaping" option will continue to be used for adults.  In addition, filtering is to be applied to the libraries' wi-fi signal for the first time.

On one level, we can regard this outcome as some level of progress.  Previously, filters were not even used for minors or for the wi-fi signal.

On another level, however, the turn of events was quite disappointing.  Why?  Because the problem with pornography use at the libraries has primarily been with adult male customers.  These men, if they are patient enough, will still be able to view hard core pornography and child pornography.  And teens, adolescents and other customers in the adult sections of the libraries will be inadvertently, involuntarily exposed to it.

How did this result germinate?  The die was cast before the meeting had begun.  Over the last couple of weeks, anti-filter forces had circled their wagons, and lined up votes of city council members who might have otherwise been inclined to vote for filters systemwide.  Before the meeting, Councilman Thompson learned that both Nancy Vaughan and Mary Rakestraw would not be supporting filters for adults.  Vaughan continues to disappoint; and Rakestraw has unfortunately been nursing a petty grievance over the manner in which the issue had initially been raised. 

Zack Matheny and Robbie Perkins never were going to support filters for adults.  Both are ersatz Republicans in the tradition of Lisa Murkowski, Mike Castle and Olympia Snowe-- ever eager to please their progressive compatriots. 

Unfortunately, cultural liberalism is deeply ingrained in Greensboro's political culture.  It even infects some people who identify themselves as Republican.

Matheny, Perkins and Vaughan probably need to be replaced on the city council next year.  Conservatives need to identify, fund and support strong candidates to oppose them.

The practical impact of last night's vote is that these council members can use it for political cover, claiming they supported filters while failing to address the most problematic demographic group that views pornography in the libraries.  And the anti-filter forces appear satisfied with the outcome.

Kudos to Danny Thompson for his leadership on this issue; to Trudy Wade for her effective debate during council meetings; and to Kathy Hartsell for her steadfast research.  But there is more work to be done.

Comments

[cheripickr]

The wisdom of this decision will be confirmed by the followup study showing a drastic reduction in the 21,000 hits per week seen previously, now that those horny little kids have been kicked out of the club.

[Joe Guarino]

Cheri, you use humor to make a great point. This should never have been regarded as a matter of controversy. It should have been a no-brainer.

[bubba]

"It should have been a no-brainer."

...not in this town, not from this city council, and not with certain self-appointed "progressive elite" blahgers to distort the facts.

[Roch101]

So, why was something that should not have been controversial controversial, Joe?

[Joe Guarino]

No, Bubba-- regrettably, as you say, not in this town. Virtually every other significant library system in the state uses filters, and gets those valuable discounts on its ISP service. But such an enticement was not enough for Greensboro, because liberal political orthodoxy has reigned. I do not know whether the new approach adopted last night will qualify for e-Rate.

[Joe Guarino]

Roch, filters should have been adopted with minimal discussion. But it became controversial because the topic became extremely symbolic for various parties on the left who regarded it as an intolerable "religious right" issue. That simply could not be tolerated in Greensboro.

Then you have the governing philosophy in the city of Greensboro that we have to defer to staff, even when they are dead wrong. Neerman is a liberal, and espouses misguided professional ideals, but she was protected from having to implement filters for adult users.

[Roch101]

I disagree, Joe. I think you have simply identified the failings of your approach to influencing public policy. The issue was controversial because those advancing implementation of filters:

1. Intentionally exaggerated and misrepresented statistics.
2. Talked past the legitimate concerns regarding the downside to filters, simply side-stepping addressing them in a genuine matter.
3. Hysterically vilified those in disagreement.

That you think something should have passed with minimal discussion but your efforts contributed to making it controversial and, most importantly, were ineffectual, is an invitation to examine your methods -- or you can blame it on others.

[Joe Guarino]

Roch, I think the discussion on the downside to filters is a matter of values. They were discussed, but the anti-filter side magnified those disadvantages in order to sway the debate. The pro-filter side felt those disadvantages were outweighed by the benefits, and by the imperative to protect minors and rid our public spaces of hard core pornography and child pornography to the extent we could.

And there was no vilification-- there was only an accurate depiction of the worldview espoused by some of the players.

Finally, there was no intentional exaggeration and misrepresentation of statistics. Instead, there was a problem with respect to the terminology. There simply was no good term to discuss what we were trying to describe.

And let's remember-- it was the anti-filter side that wanted the statistics. The pro-filter side viewed them as superfluous. Filters should have been approved without having to accumulate statistics-- and the fact they were not is a reflection of the fact that this is culturally a very liberal city, with many players who are very liberal.

[Roch101]

"And let's remember-- it was the anti-filter side that wanted the statistics."

Simply not true. This all began with Danny Thompson waving his stack of incident reports as justification for his policy proposals. It is impossible to discuss this when even basic facts are ignored.

But, congratulations on your success. I hope this means you will continue with your methods.

[Joe Guarino]

Roch, the incident you mention has been discussed amply over at Ed's. There is more than one interpretation of what happened.

The outcome on this matter was determined by the ideological predisposition of the players. They made their decisions based on whatever principles they espouse-- or the lack thereof.

[Joe Guarino]

I also think we need to remember that filters were applied for minors and for the wi-fi service. The esteemed Sandy would not have done these things unless the issue had been addressed in the city council. Remember that she was perfectly content to operate without any controls for nearly a decade before she even instituted the bandwidth shaping. And it took some negative media accounts to get her to do that.

And certain council members would not have made this happen if Thompson had not raised the issue. There was some positive outcome from this effort-- just not enough.

[Everest]

Well, I'm confused...you congratulate Danny Thompson for his leadership (which I think is laughable) and villify Matheny, et al for getting the issue wrong...didn't both those guys vote the same way? So regardless of "ideology" or "principle", didn't Danny and Zack (and everyone but Trudy actually) agree on the resolution of this issue?

I gotta tell you Joe, I've watched and read about this issue on your blog - your almost blind support for Danny Thompson notwithstanding, I see alot of the Obama/Chicago-style politics you proclaim to abhor. You're steadfastly holding onto the fact that those that don't agree with your verbatim position are corrupt - morally or otherwise. You attack their credibility, impugn their morales, and assault their character...because you don't agree with their stance? Perhaps those that weren't supportive for pure filters felt the compromise was reasonable - perhaps they thought the critics were overstating the incident numbers for pornography, or simply attacking an issue based on emotion. Filters don't guarantee complete coverage, and clearly block a multitude of legitimate uses...but you're making the perfect the enemy of the good, and attacking the character of those that disagree. Not everyone that disagrees with you Joe is devoid of character or integrity....

[Joe Guarino]

Everest, nothing at all would have happened if Thompson had not raised and pressed the issue. Matheny is a liberal Republican. He has a right to adopt that political perspective, but others have a right to characterize it. When folks enter the political sphere, others have the right to describe their ethical stance.

Character is an important attribute for elected officials.

[Doc Alexander]

Joe this supposed no-brainer became controversial not because of Danny Thompson waving a handful of papers in the air at a city council meeting, not because of "statistics" or logistics, but because we have very powerful people entrenched in power in this city. These people allow city employees to rule their areas of influence as if it were their own personal estates. They have been allowed to consolidate their power base and as such are invulnerable to accountability, responsibility and the will of the people. It's a kind of undeclared facism.

Sandy Neerman, Matt Brown, to name just two, show disinterest at best and contempt at worst toward citizens who wish to hold them accountable for their actions. As long as Robbie Perkins, Zach Matheney and now, sadly, Nancy Vaughan protect them, nothing will change and they will continue to do whatever the hell they please.

Joe you are right; there is a very deep cultural liberalism in this city and far too many people have a vested interest to maintain this dispicable status quo.

Oh, and let's not forget the amen choir in the blogosphere; Roch Smith, Ed Cone, Brandon Burgess and the rest of the jackal pack.

Congrats, Roch; you have helped keep kiddie porn readily available to predatory adult male visitors to the GSO Public Library.

[Brandon Burgess]

Doc, I have been a proponent of filters from day one.

Next time you want to call me out in public, get your facts straight and use your real name.

[Roch101]

Joe, from the beginning, I had no objections to the solution at which we have arrived. Neither, obviously, did eight of nine city council members. Did the misrepresentations, vilification (see your attempts to impugn reporter Amanda Lehmert or Doc's comment above for a repeat), the histrionics and failure to address opposing views in good faith contribute to this end or did we get her despite those methods? I say it's clearly the latter and at great cost to the credibility of those who deployed these tactics.

[Joe Guarino]

Doc, I agree for the most part. These folks are entrenched because they are held up as paragons of wisdom. Why? Because this is Greensboro, and they are doing things the Greensboro way. The people who adopt this attitude toward them tend to be very parochial, and tend not to pay much heed to what the norms are in other areas.

[Joe Guarino]

Roch, I don't accept the premises nestled within your question, so it is not possible to answer it.

[bubba]

"Did the misrepresentations, vilification (see your attempts to impugn reporter Amanda Lehmert or Doc's comment above for a repeat), the histrionics and failure to address opposing views in good faith contribute to this end or did we get her despite those methods? I say it's clearly the latter and at great cost to the credibility of those who deployed these tactics."

Absolute and unadulterated bull...t.

All the points brought forth from the porn enablers were successfully addressed. The fact that you and your fellow....porn supporters..... chose to respond the way you did indicates bad faith from almost every aspect imaginable.

The vilifications misrepresentations, distortions, and outright lies came from the viewpoint for which you have apparently appointed yourself mouthpiece and spinmonster.

This issue is not going away, whether you like it, or not.

You want a culture war in this town? You just might get one.

[Roch101]

You make my point, Joe.

[Everest]

"The vilifications misrepresentations, distortions, and outright lies came from the viewpoint for which you have apparently appointed yourself mouthpiece and spinmonster."

This from the same person who called those seeking (and incidentally, those that actually VOTED for) a reasonable solution "porn supporters"....that's rich...

So, since Danny Thompson agreed with 7 other council members in this vote, I'm curious about something...is he a "porn supporter" because he voted for the same restrictions (or lack thereof as you outline) as everyone else, or is spineless, because he didn't take the stand Trudy Wade took that it didn't go far enough...?

[Joe Guarino]

Everest, my understanding is that Thompson did not introduce the stronger motion because he did not have the votes, so he felt this was the next best thing. I can also respect Trudy Wade's position.

I seem to remember you are a Boy Scout leader. Something viewers on television could not appreciate last night is that a Boy Scout troop was present in the council chambers as this was being debated. I can only imagine what they were thinking as council members like Matheny, TDBS and the others rationalized not placing tighter controls on the possibility of porn being viewed at the library. I hope the kids-- and their leaders-- understood how wrong it was for them to take that position. I hope they are able to differentiate right from wrong, as adults and council members are supposed to be able to do.

[bubba]

"This from the same person who called those seeking (and incidentally, those that actually VOTED for) a reasonable solution 'porn supporters'....that's rich..."

That, from a known Zach Matheny shill. THAT'S rich.....

[Vivi]

I'm unsure how this filter is exactly supposed to work. Our family uses one card that was issued to my husband years ago. We have four children. So how is the filter system supposed to work to keep my children from viewing porn if they want to do so? I am quite disappointed at the band-aid effort of City Council.

Just for the record, I spoke to Sandy years ago after being offended by porn left exposed on computers. Her response was that there was nothing she could do. Since then, we purposely bypass any computer usage at the library.

[Banh Mi Tu]

Vivi, if it will help, I hear our hysterical, odious, stack-brandishing neighbors in Raleigh and Charlotte have fine public library facilities.

[Ron]

Hopefully liberalism will continue to reign. Conservatism has caused us to be stuck in the past behind our larger neighbors of Charlotte and Raleigh. If consevatives had their way in the late 1990s, the FedEx hub wouldn't be here. A lot of great things that have happened in our city would not have happened. We need to be a progressive community if we want to continue to grow.

[bubba]

"We need to be a progressive community if we want to continue to grow."

Being a "progressive" community means we will be a statist "Business as Usual" community that champions an agenda-driven political and social relativism, economic stagnation, ruled by a corrupt oligarchy serving the vested interests of the few to the detriment of the many.

We're well on our way to the status quo of half a century ago, albeit with different players with different agendas.

[Everest]

That's my point about your support of Thompson, Joe...at least Trudy has the courage of her convictions. I don't see you attacking her for voting against increasing the filtering at the library. I see you breaking your arm patting Danny on the back for the voting the same way Matheny, Vaughn, and others voted...yet you're hammering them. It's pretty inconsistent logic. Danny voted for...good. Trudy voted against...good. Everyone else voted for...partisan, liberal unethical hacks....that's what I don't get.

And I am a Scout leader, and am glad the 8 council members voted to add a filter to the computers used by minors...where most Scouts (since they're all under 18) would be.

I'm glad the library is making improvements to its internet security, as it relates to Internet access...is it perfect? No...but little in this world is, and this seems to be a reasonable move.

Not sure what it takes to be classified a Matheny "shill"...but if that means holding everyone to the same standard, or being consistent with logic, then so be it. And speaking of shills Bubba, why don't you take Danny Thompson's picture down from your bedside table....

[bubba]

"Not sure what it takes to be classified a Matheny 'shill'."

To start, like your hero, you see so-called "compromise" on the porn issue as being a positive, instead of being the weak-willed moral relativism you and your pal sanction. And don't pull the "who me?" routine here, either..

"And I am a Scout leader, and am glad the 8 council members voted to add a filter to the computers used by minors.'

....which ignores the issue that porn, including child porn, can still be accessed on the public dollar, and the significant problem still remains.

In essence, nothing of real significance has happened to change the previously unacceptable status quo.

[Roch101]

"So how is the filter system supposed to work to keep my children from viewing porn if they want to do so?" -- Vivi

You are supposed to exercise some personal responsibility for your family and get the children their own library cards so that their use of the Internet will be properly filtered. Gee, these people who want the government to do everything for them...

[Sue]

Joe wrote, "Because the problem with pornography use at the libraries has primarily been with adult male customers."

Where did you get that statistic? Can you please share the citation?

[Joe Guarino]

Vivi, thanks for the comments. I don't know what they would do in the event that cards are shared. It is a good question. I can understand your desire to stay away from the library after the experience you had.

[Joe Guarino]

Banh Mi, it is indeed ironic that other municipalities can have fine library facilities even though filters are used.

Ron, what Bubba said.

[Joe Guarino]

Everest, I am going to ask you to wrap your arms around this concept. All the important action took place BEFORE the council meeting, not DURING the council meeting. The big decisions were made beforehand regarding any vote that would be taken to filter computers used by adults. The vote to which you refer that took place during the meeting was taken since there were not sufficient votes to pass the more substantive measure Thompson would have liked to pass. And Matheny was one of the reasons the votes were not there. The vote that was taken during the council meeting was a compromise.

Matheny really ought to switch parties and become a Democrat. That party really would be a better fit for him.

[Joe Guarino]

Sue, I do not have a citation. It is what I have heard verbally or read in the course of these discussions, and it certainly seems consistent with what most of us understand about the topic. Men look at porn much more than women do. If you have information to the contrary, I would appreciate your sharing it. My recollection is that there has also been a problem with homeless men viewing porn at the central library.

[Sue]

"What I've heard" is hardly fact, Joe. I've heard other things but wouldn't purport them as facts. The problem is when you do this:

"Because the problem with pornography use at the libraries has primarily been with adult male customers. These men, if they are patient enough, will still be able to view hard core pornography and child pornography."

1. Make an assumption (it's mainly men that seek porn in the GPL)
2. Use that as fact as fact for the next statement you make.

Don't you see the danger in that? Make something up and then treat it as fact? Even if you say it 3 times, it's still not a fact.

(This has little to do with filters at the GPL. One would think you'd do a little soul-searching about presenting a heated argument. "I heard that cellphones give you brain cancer. Most of us heard that women like cellphones - I read it on the blogs. So that woman I'm diagnosing probably has brain cancer.")

[taxed out]

The policy adopted last night states the following:
all wireless access will be filtered for the category of pornography.
all children ages 17 under accessing GPL computers will be filtered for the category of pornography.
all adults accessing GPL computers will be shaped for the category of pornography.

Vivi... great question. What to do if someone shares a card. You should ask council that question during the speaker from the floor portion of a meeting.

The wi-fi hasn't successfully been shaped for the category of pornography until the week of October 11th.

The device is fully capable of shaping and blocking sites at the GPL. Why are they now asking for another $8,000 to $10,000? It would be much simpler for the staff to administer if they would just block the pornography category across the board.

They are using the same criteria in the pornography category to block and shape the sites.

Is it really worth another $10,000 to buy another device to insure that all patrons 18 and older are allowed to sit and wait for pornography to appear on the screen?

Do we really know for sure that the current device cannot handle the tiered filtering and shaping?

[bubba]

"1. Make an assumption (it's mainly men that seek porn in the GPL)
2. Use that as fact as fact for the next statement you make."

Ah yes, a putative member of the unelected oligarchy speaks!

...and offers nothing of substance regarding the actual issue, but serves up the expected knee-jerked irrelevant deflection.....as usual.

[Joe Guarino]

Sue, if you have any information to the contrary, I invite you to share it. But I believe the incident reports primarily involved adult men. At least one of them involved an instance of masturbation taking place at the library.

Another point is that the premise that most of the offenders are adult men is consistent with a common understanding of the group that accesses porn most often. It would defy the usual trend if the pattern at the library was any different.

Taxed out, I walked into the council meeting late, and missed hearing the rationale for why the library needs another $8,000 - $10,000. Could you expand on that a bit more?

[Banh Mi Thri]

With regard to the discussion of this topic on another blog, one commenter wrote six weeks ago::

"The best policy is to continue to discuss what you have predetermined to be Useful™ because that Just Seems Reasonable™ without committing to any course of action so that regardless of what actually happens you can link back to something you wrote earlier about what is Useful™ and what Just Seems Reasonable™ and say "I told you so".

Sure enough after the vote was final, a blog post appeared on that site complete with the predicted links and "knew it all along" approval of the outcome.

By the way, the commenter who left that remark in August was later banned from making any further comments on that blog. The irony is that here we are discussing filtering content...

[PseudoSam]

Sam, your obsession with Ed Cone is getting really pathetic.

[PseudoDwarf]

Obsessed? No. Accurate? You betcha.

[Everest]

Joe - here's what you should try wrapping your arms around...the VOTE is what matters, not the grandstanding and "behind the scenes efforts" prior to the vote. I don't care what anyone said prior to, of after the vote - I care how they actually vote. This situation is like the Democrats that were all for "Card Check" when they knew President Bush would veto it...and then were nowhere to be found (thankfully!) once Obama was in office, and their vote actually mattered...the VOTE is what matters.

You and Bubba and others can blast "compromise" all you want, but the one I see compromising out of all of this is clearly Danny. Robbie, Zack, Nancy, Trudy, et al all clearly made their positions known early on and voted that way - and it's our right to make judgements about them based on these views, no problem. By your own admission, Danny voted for this measure because he "knew" he didn't have the votes for a stronger policy - now, my last name is not Webster, but that sounds a lot like the definition of compromise on his part...which is fine, but let's call it what it is.

I don't have any issue with Danny's vote, or anyone elses....but your defense of him violates even basic logic. Which is why your subsequent arguements are so revealing - I know you like Danny a lot, that's clear. And you've never been a fan of Matheny, that's clear...but logic and facts are difficult things to bend your way. Matheny is not as conservative as you or I, and D3 residents have to make their own decisions, but your blind support for Danny strains your credibility Joe...which is too bad.

[bubba]

"Matheny is not as conservative as you or I, and D3 residents have to make their own decisions......."

The phony "compromise" over library porn is likely to be an energizing factor in the next several municipal elections for those of us who actually walk the conservative walk.

People like you who talk the conservative talk, but refuse to walk the conservative walk are going to be surprised.

Apparently people like you, Perkins, Matheny, and other enablers of bad citywide policy have not learned anything from the events currently happening at the national level, and to a different extent, at the countywide level.

[taxed out]

Joe, the exchange between Sandy Neerman and Council did not reveal a request for more money to implement the tiered filtering and shaping. In paraphrase, she was asked about the hardware and software and that there would not be any extra costs. She agreed with each item that was covered with her.

It was surprising to read in Amanda's article that an additional $8,000.00 to $10,000.00 may be necessary for this project. GPL just received a replacement device which was an upgrade for the DC30X which apparently had some glitches. It was reported that the glitches in the device resulted in inaccurate reporting from the Cymphonix when the data was initially being collected. The cymphonix device is capable of shaping and blocking in the same device.

In the discussions surrounding managing pornography in GPL, the staffing issue has been mentioned in that they are so busy they barley have time to service the customer.

GPL has the technology in place to make their job easier and to create a safer environment for web browsing. Why would they be in favor of adding such an administrative overhead by setting up the tiered shaping and blocking based on library card numbers?

Legal has stated that GPL is not required to offer pornography to adult patrons. The shaping based on the pornography category has not caused problems for patrons using the computers... meaning that it hasn't prevented research on breast cancer, etc. The same criteria for the category of pornography will be used to block the sites.

And going back Vivi's question. What happens if a 17 and under patron uses a library card that is issued to someone 18 and over?

[Joe Guarino]

Taxed out, thanks for the comments. Why do they want to create such an administrative headache? A couple of reasons.

They are liberals, and this is a question with ideological overtones. But Sandy Neerman also has a rigid view of what her professional vision should be. She simply doesn't want filters. She believes she has a professional "responsibility" to provide unrestricted access to internet information-- a level of access to information that she cannot even hope to fulfill with respect to the stacks within the same library.