(Fwd) RE: Protecting the minors

[Alex Byrne, Chief Librarian, NTU]

I knew that if I lurked for long enough someone would make the 
distinction between censorship and 'classification'.  McKenzie Wark 
has put it well:

"It is important to separate issues of classification
from the notion of censorship. Classification provides
information about the likely contents of a film or tv
show. That's just good consumer information. Censorship
is a separate issue. "

This is a key issue.  Just as we might wish to avoid being offended 
by a film, we might wish to be warned that the content of materials 
on the Net.  In circumstances in which we have a duty of care we 
need, firstly, some information on the content so that we can make a 
judgement and, secondly, some way of limiting access.

For example, when a friend of my children is spending the night at 
our house we would generally only hire a "G" rated video unless we 
knew the friend and his/her family well even though I am happy for my 
children to watch "PG" and, usually, "M" films.

In handling Aboriginal information, an area with which I have been 
concerned recently, there is a need to be very sensitive to some 
materials which contain secret/sacred information and also to some 
which are offensive.  In some circumstances, an Aboriginal community 
may wish such materials to be censored or limited to specific people 
(eg women's business as has become notorious with the Hindmarsh 
Island issue).  The vital issue, however, is to have some way of 
indicating sensitivity before the materials are accessed.

Tony is quite right in reminding us that sensitivity is culturally 
determined.  It also changes with time but is, nevertheless, 
important.

I have no wish to force anyone to read The Satanic Verses but I 
object strenuously to anyone who tries to suppress that book (or the 
author).  However, I also have no wish to offend anyone so I would 
have no objection to message from an appropriate 
authority (perhaps the Islamic Council) on the cover to indicate that 
some believers might find the contents offensive.

Although I have not seen the KIDCODE proposal it sounds as though it 
will provide an appropriate solution by providing a facility for 
indicating the acceptibility of material.  If a filter could limit to 
appropriately coded material, we would have a useful mechanism which 
could be used by those with a duty of care - similarly to the 
selection policies that school libraries apply for similar reasons.

This should not be confused with the downright silly censorship 
policies mentioned by Jenny Cram.  It is rather a way of indicating 
that some materials are to be preferred in certain contexts, and in 
the view of the classifiers.  Given adequate information we can judge 
for ourselves whether we accept the competence of the classifiers and 
use their advice for ourselves and/or when we have a duty of care.


Alex




****************************************************
Alex Byrne 
Chief Librarian                                   
Northern Territory University                       
PO Box 41246, Casuarina, NT 0811 AUSTRALIA               
TEL 61-89-466192  FAX 61-89-451317                    
EMAIL  alex@library.ntu.edu.au                        
****************************************************