Porn At Los Angeles Public Libraries Deemed A First Amendment Issue

Story comes courtesy of the City Maven.

By Alice M. Walton

Privacy screens on public computers are the city of Los Angeles’ answer to patrons who view pornography in libraries, a Los Angeles City Council committee was told today.

A discussion on balancing a patron’s First Amendment right to look at explicit material with other patrons’ rights to shield themselves from porn in public came about after a librarian was notified that a man was viewing such material on a computer at the Chinatown library.

The Jan. 6 incident led to public meetings on what librarians and city officials can do to limit exposure to porn.

“The community was very upset. This is not the type of thing that generally happens in the Chinatown branch,” said Cheryl Collins, interim director for branch libraries.

At that branch, the computers were moved to a less public area and outfitted with privacy screens, something that is also done at the other 71 branches and Central Library in downtown.

“If we could maintain the level of privacy without compromising security, I think we’ll find a win-win where no one can sue the city for violating their First Amendment rights,” said Councilman Ed Reyes, a member of the Arts, Parks, Health and Aging Committee. “At the same time, we have to be cognizant that there are certain characters that don’t have the best judgement in their behavior around children, around families in our libraries.”

The library system receives two to three reports per year of Angelenos using computers to look at porn, said City Librarian Martin Gomez.

Library patrons may not view child porn, which is illegal, or engage with other patrons while viewing pornographic material.

Comments

[SoufiLouis]

01:23 PM on 04/14/2011

child porn is out there all over the place. many of the females in porn online ARE underage and may or may not look older. IF you look at porn online I can garuntee you have viewed some child porn without even knowing it. Sickening. and while you look you support their abusers and further abuse. its a never ending downward spiral.

[Gronkie]

09:48 AM on 04/14/2011

So now that we've addressed the porn issue, what about wanking in the library?

[cybolt]

01:19 PM on 04/14/2011

From some of the posts here, you can assume there will be ample support for a separate area where one can give the ol bishop a polish. It is a form of self-expression, isn't it?

[European1919]

07:10 AM on 04/14/2011

Don't you have porn cinemas in the US? And DVD rental places? Public libraries are for culture, you know ... books about all sorts of stuff like architecture, art, history (including the history of porn), novels, that sort of stuff. They're for getting an education, not soiling your pants.

[SoufiLouis]

01:21 PM on 04/14/2011

yea but thats not free and not nearly creepy enough as looking at porn in public. duhh

[European1919]

02:32 PM on 04/14/2011

And I thought walking my woman round town on a cat leash was kinky ...

[thereisonlyoneparty]

01:44 AM on 04/14/2011

Porn is more of a security issue than an expression issue.

The majority of "free" porn sites are thinly veiled malware and scam sites.

The library should limit the use of the internet to prevent possible damage to the network.  The compromise should be a collection of pornography that can be viewed on specific computers that are visible to the outside world to prevent touch-oneself-itiveness.

[hagagaga]

09:13 PM on 04/13/2011

Don't you also have a right not to look if you don't want to see it?

You don't have a right not to be offended, though.

[Mary Daugherty]

08:09 PM on 04/13/2011

My opinion: porn does not belong on library computers. Just my opinion......

[linton]

07:31 PM on 04/13/2011

Who in his sane mind would want to watch porn at a public library?

[Gary Barnum]

01:37 PM on 04/13/2011

Looking at porn at the LA public library is a 1st amendment issue? Very fortunate that we don't have any other problems to worry about--LOL

[sandrita mason]

01:13 PM on 04/13/2011

As a life-long user of the L.A. Public Library, I know that the viewing of pornography on library computers has been a problem ever since computers and the internet were installed in the libraries. Staff have complained. Parents have complained. As pointed out in this article, complaints found their way to top city officials. But, no one acted like they wanted to do something about library porn until the National Chinese Welfare Council complained. Yes, the National Chinese Welfare Council!

[socalcde]

11:32 AM on 04/13/2011

"Library patrons may not view child porn, which is illegal, or engage with other patrons while viewing pornographic material."

Wouldn't you like to think that this goes without saying.

[anytimecowboy]

10:44 AM on 04/13/2011

This IS a first amendment issue. Watching porn does not create a danger for others. Personally I would not watch porn in public. But I do have a question; does this allow gay porn as well as straight? Usually we are left out.

[dbrett480]

11:13 AM on 04/13/2011

This isn't a First Amendment issue as multiple Supreme Court decisions have ruled that the First Amendment deals strictly with political speech and not obscene content. Also one of the reasons why we have public libraries is for kids to do homework and read after school. Parents have a right not to have their kids exposed to this content in a public setting.

[anytimecowboy]

11:39 AM on 04/13/2011

I thought that Libraries were bathrooms for the homeless....With apologies to the writers of Modern Family.

[Aldebaran]

01:11 PM on 04/13/2011

Oh please, F the children. I'm sick of ppl carrying on like the legislature should only craft and center public policy debates around the needs of children. So the reason libraries exist of for a place for children to study and do their homework? All this time I thought libraries were places for young and old alike. But hey if children are going to be there, maybe they should get rid of all the books with curse words since parents have the right for their kids not to be exposed to profanity

[thereisonlyoneparty]

01:46 AM on 04/14/2011

The issue of network security is what really needs to be considered.

The content may be problematic is viewable to a large number of people (it is likely a crime to show pornography to a minor, not sure though), but creating a situation where the network is harmed is something that is problematic to the library itself.

[cybolt]

10:32 AM on 04/13/2011

I'd venture that The Framers had nothing like this in mind when considering the First Ammendment. I'm as big a backer of the FA as anyone, and have taken some extremely unpopular stances here, but protecting a person's right to openly view sexually explicit material in the presence of children aint in any interpretation of the FA I know of.

[anthonyCA]

02:20 PM on 04/13/2011

Most of society thinks that material of a prurient nature is not appropriate for children, as they don't have the maturity or life experience/wisdom to properly quantify that material.

Well, children don't have the life experience/wisdom to properly quantify material about atheism or communism or terrorism or slavery or the KKK or abortion or Fred Phelps or evolution or tapeworms or Dracula or human reproduction or death--all subject matters which could be deemed offensive in one form or another. Should we ban all those subjects from libraries as well?

The reason that the Framers didn't specifically enumerate pornography when drafting the FA is the same reason they didn't do it for the KKK, abortion or Fred Phelps.

[cybolt]

03:57 AM on 04/14/2011

Last try: I appreciate your post although I find it disingenuous.

I can comfortably state that graphic pictures or videos of extreme pornography dealing with animals or children are in no way appropriat¬e for a public library and further, that barring access to those images in no way puts us on the proverbial "slippery slope."

If you feel otherwise, my sympathy for you.

[eXpresso]

03:02 AM on 04/14/2011

what part of (the report) "At that branch, the computers were moved to a less public area and outfitted with privacy screens, something that is also done at the other 71 branches and Central Library in downtown."

did you interpret to be (your assertion) "but protecting a person's right to openly view sexually explicit material in the presence of children" ?

and it would appear that your knowledge and understanding of the Constitution is somewhat elementary.

[cybolt]

03:53 AM on 04/14/2011

I don't think my knowledge of the Constitution is much different from any decently educated layman but thanks for the slap in the face. (It's quite telling as to who you are and where you’re really coming from.) As a former news reporter degreed in journalism who studied the First Amendment rigorously in several classes, I might have a better than average understanding of it

While I sympathize with both sides of this highly contentious issue and I shudder at the potential narrowing of speech-related freedoms, I have come to reject the argument that blocking pornographic sites at a public facility is an infringement on someone’s first amendment rights. The libraries don’t carry pornographic books and magazines, do they? They’re not mandated to carry them, are they?

The problems here?

1. The computers are still well within view of small children.
2. The privacy screens are like old projection tvs; they still allow for crystal clear viewing in about 140 of the 180 degrees.
3. The computers lack any method of filtering for use by kids under the age of say… 16.

Now please, take the last word. Folks such as yourself usually *need* it.

[Cymbol]

10:31 AM on 04/13/2011

Oh-my-gosh - I'll never touch another library computer. . . *shivers*.

[Marioth]

10:22 AM on 04/13/2011

Good for LA. Too many busy-body puritans in this country tell us what we can and cannot see. You have no right to be protected from what your eyes behold. The mental state of "being offended" is always a choice.

[dbrett480]

11:15 AM on 04/13/2011

You're correct that there is not a right to be protected from offensive content. However, in a government institution dedicated to education where children frequent we must use common sense.

[Aldebaran]

01:25 PM on 04/13/2011

At the Austin Public Library anyone over the age of 18 can request a w/o a filter. You're assigned a computer that has a privacy screen which no one, adults or children can view. I tell you this to inform you that there are ways to craft public policy that protects children w/o extinguishing the rights of others.

[terjac]

01:28 PM on 04/13/2011

You can view all the porn you want to but not in a public library.

[Aldebaran]

03:49 PM on 04/13/2011

so glad i live a liberal society and far away from the police state of your dreams

[odetojoy]

10:12 AM on 04/13/2011

Come on! This is a public place. Any person who needs to view porn in public where families go is not thinking clearly. So, now I have to avoid taking my kids to the library......and especially their bathrooms! Sad.

[Aldebaran]

01:26 PM on 04/13/2011

So if kids didn't go to the library would it then be ok?