Editorial
Mark L. Smith

In February, the Austin American-Statesman reported that Austin Public Library would install filtering software on all APL Internet computers. A few days later, the Statesman carried a follow-up article describing the library’s intention to remove blocks from most filtered sites.

Rather than fickle management, these actions represent the dilemma library managers face regarding Internet services. A resource that seemed two years ago to be an unquestioned benefit to libraries now seems to be summed up by a dubious choice: Pick your lawsuit.

In Greek mythology, the gods forced Odysseus to sail between the twin perils of the whirlpool Scylla and the jagged rocks of Charybdis. Likewise, library managers who rightly choose to offer Internet access now must navigate between community members and staff angered by library policy that seems to expose children to pornography on the one hand and, on the other hand, civil libertarians who believe that nearly any filter is an infringement of First Amendment rights. Poor navigational skills can endanger the entire ship: all Internet access, library funding, costly legal fees, and community good will and support.

Each side tries to trivialize the other, but, as the Austin Public Library has learned--at least in Texas--both sides are grounded in law. While the rest of the country awaits the Supreme Court’s final ruling on the Communications Decency Act, Texas already has a statute that makes it a crime to display harmful (read: pornographic) material to persons under eighteen.

Conversely, U.S. circuit court precedent in ACLU v. Reno holds that the Internet is a "pure public forum" and, as such, is afforded the highest protection under the First Amendment. This and other points compelled one Florida county attorney to advise the county librarian (in what might be the most thorough legal discussion of the subject yet written) that "a policy to adopt filtering software at library Internet sites is not legally viable in the long term. It would most likely involve the county in litigation." And libraries that filter from the outset should note that this same county attorney writes, "First Amendment protection of expression applies with especial force in cases where prior restraint is exercised by a governmental body." He adds: "By holding itself out to its patrons as being able to control the content of sites accessible through its Internet terminals, the library would only exacerbate the situation."

Austin Public is among the many libraries that have struck delicate bargains between decency laws and First Amendment rights. So far, these compromises have kept libraries out of the courts. No library wants to be sued; however, as Ann Symons points out in her article, an eventual test case is inevitable. Until then, librarians will have only their strength of character, navigational skills, and prevailing winds to guide them through troubled waters.