NYT Opposes Mandatory Censorware

The NYT took a principled stand yesterday and urged President Clinton to veto any appropriations bill that makes censorware mandatory in schools and libraries. I hope he listens. It would take real guts for Clinton to make this a reason to veto an entire spending bill -- his opponents would probably say he was "shutting down the government to keep porn in schools." But if he's thinking about his legacy, he should remember that in 20 years everyone, not just geeks, librarians and high school students, will know how rotten censorware is.

Comments

Finally!

[evanbd]

I thought it was just us geeks complaining and getting ignored. This is one of the first things in the YRO box in a while that I didn't find downright depressing. It's great that the NYT chooses to help with this. Hopefully this is a step in the direction of noticing that these things are BAD, be they effective or not.

Maybe they have a different constitution?

[www.sorehands.com]

I thought most copies of the constitution included the first amendment.

What is the point of free speech, if there are mechanisms put into place to block people from reading the free speech.

Re:These aren't people

[www.sorehands.com]

That argument fails when you put censorware into a public library.

Some libraries will perit this to be removed, only after request identification. Providing identification may create an atmosphere of intimidation when reviewing these materials. Also in public schools, there are 18 and 19 year olds. What about their rights?