[Foundation-l] Board resolutions on controversial content and images of identifiable people

[Milos Rancic]

On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 16:20, Kim Bruning <kim at bruning.xs4all.nl> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 06:03:24PM +0200, Kim Bruning wrote:
>> To wit, the proposed implementation of a category system for
>> controversial content (required for many plausible implementations
>> of this point) is exploitable by 3rd parties and/or can lead to
>> in-community conflicts; depending on the exact chosen
>> implementation.
>
> I would like to expand on this point.
>
> Apparently, the generation of such categorisation schemes has
> previously been discussed by the American Library Association as far
> back as 1951.
>
> A relevant paragraph from their conclusion (last amended Jan 19, 2005):
>
> "Labels on library materials may be viewpoint-neutral directional aids
> that save the time of users, or they may be attempts to prejudice or
> discourage users or restrict their access to materials. When labeling is
> an attempt to prejudice attitudes, it is a censor's tool. The American
> Library Association opposes labeling as a means of predisposing people's
> attitudes toward library materials." [1]
>
> I assume that the board was previously not aware of the central role such a
> categorisation scheme would take in any form of practicable image
> filter.

Board was aware of that, as the first Robert Harris' report included
very similar text from Canadian librarian association.