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

Tue Aug 23 14:20:28 UTC 2011

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.

sincerely,
	Kim Bruning

[1] http://www.ala.org/Template.cfm?Section=interpretations&Template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=8657

-- 
[Non-pgp mail clients may show pgp-signature as attachment]
gpg (www.gnupg.org) Fingerprint for key  FEF9DD72
5ED6 E215 73EE AD84 E03A  01C5 94AC 7B0E FEF9 DD72