Effect of CIPA on teens access in public libraries

As I gear up to address teens and tech in public libraries for a group assignment I thought I would look at CIPA (Child Internet Protection Act) and reflect on how it effects teens access to Internet resources.

From the FCC website

What CIPA Requires

• 
  
  Schools and libraries subject to CIPA may not receive the discounts offered by the E-rate program unless they certify that they have an Internet safety policy that includes technology protection measures. The protection measures must block or filter Internet access to pictures that are: (a) obscene, (b) child pornography, or (c) harmful to minors (for computers that are accessed by minors). Before adopting this Internet safety policy, schools and libraries must provide reasonable notice and hold at least one public hearing or meeting to address the proposal.
• 
  
  Schools subject to CIPA are required to adopt and enforce a policy to monitor online activities of minors.
• 
  
  Schools and libraries subject to CIPA are required to adopt and implement an Internet safety policy addressing: (a) access by minors to inappropriate matter on the Internet; (b) the safety and security of minors when using electronic mail, chat rooms, and other forms of direct electronic communications; (c) unauthorized access, including so-called “hacking,” and other unlawful activities by minors online; (d) unauthorized disclosure, use, and dissemination of personal information regarding minors; and (e) measures restricting minors’ access to materials harmful to them.

Schools and libraries are required to certify that they have their safety policies and technology in place before receiving E-rate funding.

• 
  
  CIPA does not affect E-rate funding for schools and libraries receiving discounts only for telecommunications, such as telephone service.
• 
  
  An authorized person may disable the blocking or filtering measure during any use by an adult to enable access for bona fide research or other lawful purposes.
• 
  
  CIPA does not require the tracking of Internet use by minors or adults.

From this description of what CIPA requires I think the third bullet has the most impact on the restrictions that libraries will put on teen access.  Particularly part "(b) the safety and security of minors when using electronic mail, chat rooms, and other forms of direct electronic communications"  This could include social networking sites, which may lead parents or librarians to restrict those sites in the interest of "safety and security".

My own experience has been that the "safety and security" rationale can lead otherwise strong supporters of IF to blink and restrict access.  Teens in particular are vulnerable to this because the younger generation has a much lower threshold for privacy than most adults.  Teens will share information and stories publicly that adults consider private information.  From the adult perspective this is a dangerous situation in which predators can learn enough about a teen to become a real life threat.

While I understand that there are predators and there is a certain amount of caution that is justified I tend to err on the side of free access rather than restricted access.  By blocking teen use of social networking sites in libraries we place those who cannot afford a computer in their home at a further disadvantage in the growing world of online social interactions.  The dangers on social networking sites do not outweigh their considerable and growing usefulness as a place to connect with people from all over the country and world.  I would advocate attempts to educate parents and teens about the possible dangers from identity thieves and other predators rather than blocking use of popular social networking sites.

Another key point is that while CIPA is a set of requirements that must be met for certain funding aid, it is not a legal requirement and any library that was willing to forgo the aid could disregard the rules.  This may be unlikely because public institutions rarely have enough money, let alone extra to cover a new gap.  However, this loophole is one that I keep in mind so that if future restrictions become tighter than my professional ethics will support I have a possible protest action.