Saturday, May 19, 2007

Quick Thought

Since I've been taking this class, I've been giving more consideration to the policies that are in place where I work. My library system decided that we are going to convert to self pick-up of holds, because patrons like to be self-sufficient and it will free up staff time to do other (as yet unspecified) tasks.

Everyone is abuzz at this news, because self pick-up of holds has implications for patron privacy - how do we prevent patrons from browsing the holds shelves, looking at the private materials their neighbors have ordered? There hasn't really been any dialogue about this, or how privacy is going to be protected.

It's going to be a hard transition, I think, if we assign patrons a code or other way to identify their own holds. I envision a lot of confusion. But using patron names and attaching those names to publicly viewable materials would be a mistake - what if Patron A sees that Patron B, who she knows, has books waiting on homosexuality, or witchcraft, or divorce?

I looked for a little information about this online and found this advice from the ALA's privacy toolkit:

Avoid library practices and procedures that place information on public view
(e.g., using postcards for overdue notices or requested materials; using patron
names to identify self-pickup holds; placing staff terminals so the screens
can be read by the public; using sign-in sheets to use computers or other
devices; and providing titles of reserve requests or interlibrary loans over the
telephone to users' family members or answering machines).

<>

Thursday, May 10, 2007

More on Liability

Thanks to Catherine, I now have a better idea of what protections librarians have against being arrested or fined for potentially exposing kids or other people to images, sounds, or words they find offensive. I find it reassuring that libraries are regarded as public forums and are exempted from the harmful to minors law.
There was another pretty egregious case that got some press recently in which a substitute teacher was sentenced to jail time because children viewed porn pop-ups that kept coming up on a classroom computer. From this Washington Post account:

A 40-year-old former substitute teacher from Connecticut is facing prison time following her conviction for endangering students by exposing them to pornographic material displayed on a classroom computer... The defense claimed the graphic images were pop-up ads generated by spyware already present on the computer prior to the teacher's arrival.


A New York Times article provides more details about the case - the substitute teacher didn't know anything about computers, the school was running outdated machines with inadequate protections, and the substitute was uneducated about technology to the point that she did not know how to stop the ads from popping up or how to safely turn off the computer.

At least libraries and librarians will probably not face that particular challenge.

Sunday, May 6, 2007

Special Rules for Broadcast Mediums

I don't have our textbook in front of me, and I'm pretty sure that's where I was reading about this, but this week I have been thinking about the difference in regulations and rules regarding the Internet as opposed to television and radio. The FCC standards for broadcast television and radio are so strict, especially after the Janet Jackson super bowl incident and subsequent crackdown.

My husband does a radio show on a community radio station where he plays music (and, by station rules, 80% of what he plays has to be on independent music labels) and he was trained about the 7 words you can't say on the air, although he can play songs containing profanities after eleven o'clock at night. The CDs he chooses are supposed to be previewed for swear words, but this isn't always complete or accurate. There is a procedure for if he accidentally plays something with a swear word in it: he has to immediately stop the CD and log the incident.

What really scares me is that he and other radio DJs are considered to be personally liable for what they play on the air - if the FCC went after him for playing a song with 'fuck' in the lyrics, not only could the radio station be fined, but he could be fined as well. I wonder if there is something similar that could happen with CIPA - could an individual librarian be held responsible for an incident where a child saw something inappropriate on the Internet? Could a librarian potentially be arrested for something like that, if a kid saw some porn on a computer at the library?