I'm beginning to know what it felt like to be surrounded by luddites centuries ago. The fear of technology has driven many boneheaded decisions over the centuries -- and 1997 may be remembered as a time when lemmings around the world raced to see who could develop the most short- sighted internet policies.15

Time and again I've watched seemingly rational people work themselves into a frenzy over the alleged destructive power of the 'net. Draconian measure abound, although the folks in Loudon County Virginia outshine all others. Just a few short months ago, the Supreme Court stood unanimous in rejecting a law that dumbed down web site content to that suitable for children. Weak-willed congressmen and the President supported a clearly unconstitutional and unenforceable set of rules that banned things perfectly legal in every other medium. Now library boards around the country are going even further, asking librarians to become a police force inside the walls of knowledge. How ironic... the very revolution that brings information -- and therefore power -- to the masses [via one of our most sacred institutions,] is being squashed by those who would ration out access based on an ill- defined set of values. Values, I might add, that are not even being *defined* in the community where they are being enforced. 110

[Anyone involved with the internet or the web knows full well just how flawed these software filters are... sites about breast cancer are blocked, AIDS information shut off... and even those folks that find information about sexually transmitted diseases on the library's computers risk serious embarrassment or worse when they're caught by the nation's snooping library police. 125]

Lest you think I am some kind of first amendment absolutest, there are things kids shouldn't see, and I can think of plenty of stuff online that would make library workers and users upset to see on a screen. But the internet requires us to develop *new* ways of thinking about information. Slapping print-world rules on this emerging medium is both silly and unimaginative. We can't run around for the next few years stomping out this revolution... we must face its challenges by opening our collective minds to new paradigms and new approaches. There's something really simple about just cutting off access to controversial information, especially when thrown under the umbrella of preventing sexual harrassment. But I would argue that not only is that approach not legal, it also doesn't begin to prepare our communities for the complexity of the real information age. 215

These rules are going to be pretty hard to figure out, and to be honest, I'm not entirely sure what they should encompass... but I do know that over the last few decades, we have -- at times -- let technology substitute for good parenting. We've let TV become a babysitter and computer CDROMs to take the place of story time. The internet is a great and safe place for kids -- but they need guidance and, yes, supervision. Spend time with your children online... 2:45

As for the rest of us, the Supreme Court has said time and again that speech cannot be limited to that suitable for children. I'm no lawyer, but when it comes to accessing the great storehouse of information -- and power -- online, it seems like the justices have the right starting point.What's needed are reasonable, common-sense guidelines and restrictions, not reactionary, politically correct limitations which overreact to a very narrow problem. Library board members around the country would do well to challenge their myopic ways of thinking -- and start with the idea that information and knowledge are the power we were all meant to share. 3:10

[words in brackets cut from final piece]