Thirteen to child in 1.4 seconds

2007 July 27
tags: , , , ,

The issue of restricting or regulating access to library content is not a new one. But Brian‘s recent experience has put it on my mind again:

The mother was angry that her child could have checked out such a movie, and didn’t understand why the library wasn’t enforcing the MPAA movie ratings.

For some reason the library felt the shoulder shrug and explanation that libraries don’t censor was inadequate in this case so they came up with four possible responses. Regulate materials based on item/patron type. isn’t possible within their ILS, so that’s out. Separate or label the ‘adult’ collection in this case, I agree with the ACLU that this type of segregation amounts to censorship. When libraries and librarians begin judging the content of their materials we’ve crossed the line from providing access to adding content and that, my friends, is a slippery slope. The idea of labeling, specifically, strikes me as strange, even though the library is not legally bound to provide or restrict access based on MPAA ratings, it IS a labeling system, is it not? So for the library to re-label would create superfluous content AND, possibly contradict the MPAA?

The last option, start a viewers advisory program, fascinates me. A video advisory would be more than a simple list, as so many readers’ advisories are, but a collection of published movie reviews and warnings. Because this is not content that the library itself has produced, it has simply collected and provided, it would violate my censorship/authorship objections. It just might work!

But soft! Imagine this: two patrons in line – similar age, both mothers – one notices the video the other is checking out and comments that it’s quite graphic. The other smiles and says, ‘oh, in that case, I’ll watch it after my daughter has gone to bed.’ Would the library object? Nope. We don’t comment, but others can.

So what if we facilitated that conversation? Perhaps a wiki/blog of movie review? Or skip the middle man and let patrons comment right on the catalog? Then Brian’s conversation with the mother could go, ‘gosh, we really can’t prevent children from using the library, but I’d suggest that you could leave a note here. [turns the computer screen toward her] so other moms might get a fair warning.’

Would it successfully dissuade her? Maybe. Maybe not – but I’d sure like to read that review.

1 Comment leave one →
2007 July 27
herzogbr permalink

Just a clarification on “labeling.” I was talking about two separate things – one was for us to put “subjective” labels on the DVDs, such as “adult,” “comedy,” family,” etc. The other idea was to label according to MPAA ratings. Since most DVD covers are different, and the ratings printed on the covers are often difficult to find, we were going to get bigger and standard R, PG, PG-13, etc., labels, so it would be easier for patrons browsing the shelves to see what the film was rated.

I agree with you in that, in the first case, the library would be overstepping its “access to information” role. But in the second case, we’re making the already-established information easier to find.

And yes, pretty much everything we’re working on is for the in-person patron, browsing the physical shelves. Allowing such interaction with patrons via our catalog would be great, too – any forum that allows people to pool our collective knowledge and experiences for the benefit of the community is worth exploring.

Leave A Comment

Note: You can use basic XHTML in your comments. Your email address will never be published.

Subscribe to this comment feed via RSS