Free Speech 1, Filters 0

Holland, Michigan was founded by Dutch settlers in the mid 1800's. This is a city that votes predominately Republican, has one church for every three people, outlaws booze on Sundays and, in general, is pleasant, picturesque, and prosperous. It's also a community that is growing rapidly, with most of the growth in ethnic communities. Still, the "V" section of the phone book, with all our Vanden's and Ver's and Van's, is as thick as your thumb.

I'm a native child of this town and have the sort of love/hate relationship with it that is common between people and their hometowns. So I was chagrined when I found out from my mother-in-law, a retired Head Start teacher who lives in Holland, that there was going to be a vote to force the public library to put filters on their computers.

I received my first library card from Herrick Public Library when I was five years old. I rented pictures from them to hang in my bedroom, went to their movie series on Saturday mornings, and even applied for a job with them as a freshman in high school. (They turned me down.) The lady who gave me that card still works there, and we always exchange kind words when I go in these days, asking about each other's families and such. So it hurt my head to hear that someone was storming the gates of my beloved Herrick.

At its very core, the filtering issue is simple. Some people fear that children will see pornography, either on their own computer screens by accidentally opening an adult site, or on someone else's screen. Part two of that fear is that pornography is harmful to children. These are not unreasonable fears in themselves, though there is a lot of debate on how traumatic a peek at adult content would be for a child. Additionally, Herrick, like most public libraries, has not really had big trouble with people surfing porn on their computers. The reason for that is pretty simple. At the library, you are in a big open area next to huge glass windows being watched by a lady who most likely knows your mom, no matter how old you are. Still, it is a reasonable debate to ask what can be done to prevent accidental hits to porn sites, or to keep adolescents from acting inappropriately around younger children. No one wants kids to see porn.

The problem is, there was no debate. One group of citizens put together a petition and got a motion on a ballot with an already cookie cut solution: filters. Herrick Public Library serves four different electorates: Holland City, Holland Township, Park Township and Lake Township. Only Holland City residents would get to vote on an issue that would affect all four electorates. It was also a little backhanded how the whole thing was crafted. Should the vote pass, and Herrick Public Library fail to put filters on its computers, the City of Holland would cease funding the library. It's like shooting one leg on a horse. It may live, but it won't be pulling the cart anymore. What was surprising, both for me and, I bet, for the Family Research Council that was organizing the filtering campaign, is that this measure did not sail smoothly into the law books. In fact, it was voted down.

There aren't enough liberals in Holland to make a pie, but when the filtering issue came up, they quickly rose in a way I had never seen before in my entire life. Articles started appearing in the local paper, the Holland Sentinel. Groups started organizing informational sessions and demonstrations of the software. Issues were tossed back and forth like artillery. Because there were people on both sides who had already made up their minds on the subject, the battle was being fought in the middle, where independents and moderate Republicans, taken by surprise by this topic, were suddenly looking deep to see what they thought about the whole thing. The side supporting filters was well funded, with ties to larger national organizations. The side opposing filters was not well funded at all (operating on a budget about one-twentieth the size of the pro-filter group's) and was entirely grass roots. Parents of my friends, including my wife's folks, were helping lead the way in the good fight against what they perceived as censorship. The younger generation, my wife, my friends and I, became involved as well, helping canvass when the time came, donating money, giving demonstrations on the inadequacy of the software, and discussing the issue on a national web site that we run.

The issues surrounding the library filters quickly become murky. In logic, you learn that you can't argue two sides unless there is a common starting premise. In this case, the premise was missing. Part of the reason for this is that democracy was brought in way too late. There were several solutions besides filtering that could be used to protect children from pornography. However, the advocators of filters had already decided on the solution for the community and were pushing their decision in an aggressive and abusive way. To them, it was what was necessary to protect kids. To others, it felt like the pro-filtering advocates were trying to tell them what they could and could not have access to.

In reality, it's not really necessary to do anything more to prevent children's exposure to pornography in the Herrick Public Library than what is being done now. The library already has, and had before this whole thing started, a clear policy on what is not appropriate in the computer area. A staff person from the library is in constant attendance. This is a much more effective safeguard than a buggy filtering program would have been. As someone said in one of the town meetings, "The best filter in Holland is the good people of Holland."

In the end, the Family Research Council and their allies shot themselves in the foot with their tactics, and the grass roots movement worked hard and diligently to use that stumble to their advantage. The filtering advocates hit with a full court press, even using presidential candidate Senator John McCain to get their messages across. Even though Hollanders may be conservative and prone to a sleepy Midwestern pace of life, they are nobody's dupes. Had the measure passed, it would have been a tragedy marking the failure of the democratic process. In one of the proudest days of my life, Holland decided not that children should have access to porn, but that democracy in a small town is not something you can ride rough shod over. No matter where the issue goes from here, at least it will start in its rightful place in the process.

Author's Biography
Cliff Lampe graduated from Kalamazoo College (Michigan) in 1996 with degrees in psychology and spanish. After spending time teaching and working as a suicide interventionist in Kalamazoo, Cliff moved to Ann Arbor, Michigan to work for the Institute for Social Research as a Survey Specialist. At present, Cliff is a doctoral student in the School of Information at the University of Michigan. He is researching open source software, digital preservation, and representing under-priviliged populations through technology. Besides working towards his degree, Cliff works as a book reviewer for Slashdot.org and a developer on Everything, a flexible web-based database.

Related Resources
Internet Issue Links, compiled by the Family Research Council
A compendium of news articles and Michigan laws on Michigan libraries and Internet filtering, created by the Northville District Library
A guide to the different Internet filters and how they work, published by the Northville District Library
Unfiltered Internet Access at Library Under Fire (Holland Sentinel, October 17, 1999)
Accidental Porn Access in Question (Holland Sentinel, February 15, 2000)
Lightening Crashes (Slashdot, February 21, 2000)
Holland, Mich., Residents Set For Showdown on Internet Filtering (Freedom Forum Online, February 21, 2000)
Filters Rejected: Proposal to Screen Library Terminals Fails 55% to 45% (Holland Sentinel, February 23, 2000)
Net Access Policy May Take Shape (Holland Sentinel, February 25, 2000)
Filters Voted Down In Holland, MI (Filtering Facts Newsletter, February 28, 2000