There should also be a procedure for promptly unblocking sites that are blocked erroneously. Another argument against use of screening technology is that there is no need for it since there is no conclusive proof that minors are harmed by porn . The last argument against use of screening technology that I will address today is that the First Amendment prevents libraries from doing so . As I see it, the First Amendment does not require public libraries to provide unlimited Internet access to patrons. The purpose of public libraries is to further public education and research and to provide a means of preserving valuable materials that would otherwise be lost to future generations.
Libraries can under the Constitution adopt Internet policies consistent with that historic purpose.
By adopting such policies, libraries would not have to concern themselves about Internet porn sites because access would only be provided to Internet sites containing material with serious artistic, literary, political or scientific value. We are here today because a Bill has been introduced which would require New York City public libraries and the Board of Education to do what they should have done long ago, without the need for legislation. Morality in Media supports Councilman Oddo's bill. It should now enact legislation to protect children in public libraries and schools from access to sex material provided by similar establishments in cyberspace.