Library organizing content filtering response

Wednesday afternoon’s Coeur d’Alene Library Board meeting drew cries for change and concerns over practicality during a lively discussion about the state’s new restrictions passed under the pretense of protecting children.

House Bill 194 — which passed with overwhelming approval and was signed into law in April — requires all public libraries in Idaho to maintain a content filtering system blocking pornographic material on library computers, through the building’s wireless network and through any wireless hotspot devices available for checkout. The legislation cited protecting children and passersby from unwanted exposure to obscene materials. The unfunded mandate takes effect July 1, 2020.

“What strikes me as odd,” library director Bette Ammon told the committee, “is that we haven’t ever had a problem with this. I haven’t heard of a single librarian in the state who has a problem like this. This is a solution without a problem.”

Board members debated everything from required costs to technical demands to textbook First Amendment issues as they worked to negotiate the pitfalls of the new requirements. The legislation requires every library that receives public funding to abide by the statute but gives little guidance over cost structuring.

“When you look at the fiscal notes on 194,” board member Kathleen Sayler pointed out, “it really doesn’t give any kind of fiscal pathway to accomplish this.”

Ammon said she would join a conference call on Monday with other librarians to begin the process for complying with the soon-to-be state law, saying she was eager to collaborate in order to come up with answers.

“Right now, we have no idea how expensive this will be,” she told the board. “We don’t know exactly what kind of equipment we’ll be able to use, what will work with the current systems we have in place or what kind of time frame we’re looking at to install it. We’re meeting with Kirk [Johnson, the city of Coeur d’Alene’s network systems administrator] and Christopher [Brannon, the library’s IT coordinator], but they’ll need answers, too, before they can evaluate what we need to do.”

The Coeur d’Alene Public Library’s technological challenges stem from three services it provides: desktop work stations, the wireless network and the wireless internet pucks available for checkout. While filtering and monitoring certificantes on desktop work stations in the building are relatively easy to install, many patrons bring their own wireless devices to the library for internet connection. Those devices will be harder to monitor, Johnson told The Press.

“Then you consider the [virtual private networks, also known as VPNs],” board vice-chairman Kraig Lysek said. “It’s so easy to get around firewalls, or override the VPNs. It’s child’s play, really.”

Conversely, if library staff receives and accepts a request to lift a particular restriction for a particular patron (as provided in HB 194), employees might have to coordinate with Johnson, Brannon or other city staff to accommodate the guest. The process could prove cumbersome, Ammon hypothesized.

As for the wireless internet pucks, the board almost unanimously voiced concern over the technical prospects of protecting children to the standard the state will soon require, as the user will leave the premises after checking out, curtailing the library’s ability to filter content.

Other concerns brought up included the potential and inadvertent blocking of research that shares the same tags as pornographic sites, marketing ploys from adult websites designed to trigger content filters through benign words, and parental authorization requirements for children checking out wireless internet pucks.

Lysek also introduced a new concern into the content filtering equation: the very nature of pornography as debated in the United States Supreme Court.

“What defines pornography?” Lysek asked. “Who decides what pornography is, and how much does it vary from library to library?”

Part of the Supreme Court’s 1973 decision over Miller v. California declares three standards to define pornography, the last of which reads, “Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.”

“So who defines if something has value?” Lysek pressed.

The board is brainstorming possible responses, including an open letter or a collaboration with other libraries to create enough political backlash to convince lawmakers in Boise to change their minds. Framework for a response is expected to be voted upon at the board’s next meeting on Oct. 23. In the meantime, many city libraries’ board members agreed these problems may have been avoided had HB 194 gone through appropriate legislative review.

“This was passed very, very late in the session,” Sayler said. “They passed this, but they didn’t handle the consequences.”

“I think it’s unfortunate this passed so quickly,” City Council member and board liaison Kiki Miller said. “I hope [the Idaho Legislature] has a chance to revisit this issue … There’s always a possibility they could change their minds. They need to revisit this, because our representatives who passed this meant well, but none of them are librarians. None of them are in this field. None of them understand the problems with this law.”