A new federal bill aims to ensure that students and others have access to online LGBTQ resources by ensuring these materials aren’t blocked by Internet filters in schools and libraries.
The “Don’t Block LGBTQ Act,” introduced by Congressman Mike Honda (D-CA), aims to prohibit schools and libraries that receive federal subsidies for their Internet connections from blocking Internet access to LGBTQ resources. The bill explains:
The term ‘lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer resources’ means information that is related to homosexuality, bisexuality, transgender identity, transgender status, gender nonconformity, gender expansive, gender identity, sexual orientation, or related topics, except that such term does not include content that is obscene, child pornography, or harmful to minors.
Honda, a former teacher and principal whose district covers Silicon Valley, has long been a staunch ally and supporter of LGBTQ equality. His granddaughter is transgender.
The bill sounds like a great idea, but I worry that it will be difficult to implement. Back in March, I wrote about Kiddle, a new, “kid-safe” search engine, and some similar sites that went too far in blocking LGBTQ content. Some LGBTQ-related searches brought up the judgmental, “Oops, looks like your query contained some bad words. Please try again!” Others led to the message,“Please realize that while Kiddle has nothing against the LGBT community, it’s hard to guarantee the safety of all the search results for such queries. We recommend that you talk to your parent or guardian about such topics.” Kiddle has tried to fix things—but the incident points out the difficulty of figuring out—technically or with human editors—what is kid-appropriate LGBTQ content and what falls under the “obscene” category.
Another example: I follow the keywords “lesbian mom” on Google News. Not the broad Google search engine, but News in particular. These keywords pull up some stories that are indeed about lesbian parents raising their children—but as of this writing, they also pull up links to sites that are clearly porn. I’ve sent feedback to Google, with no response as of yet. If arguably the best search engine in the world can’t tell the difference between news and porn, I worry that schools and libraries will have difficulty doing so even with the variety of filtering software that now exists.
As the American Library Association (ALA) notes:
Research demonstrates that filters consistently both over- and underblock the content they claim to filter. Filters often block adults and minors from accessing a wide range of constitutionally protected speech. Content filters are unreliable because computer code and algorithms are still unable to adequately interpret, assess, and categorize the complexities of human communication, whether expressed in text or in image.’
The ALA points out the demonstrated “negative effects” of content filters and their potential conflict with First Amendment rights, but recognizes that local libraries and schools are bound by state and federal regulations and thus need to filter some materials. It recommends that “libraries and schools that choose to use content filters should implement policies and procedures that mitigate the negative effects of filtering to the greatest extent possible.”
Still, maybe the idea is to get the ball rolling and build congressional support for the bill as the technology also evolves. (The bill currently has 11 cosponsors, all Democrats.) And even just having such legislation on the horizon may get more schools and libraries working towards solutions.
Despite the obstacles, then, I offer kudos to Rep. Honda for identifying the blocking of LGBTQ resources as a problem and working to solve it, on behalf of all our young people. School Library Journal has more on the bill, including quotes from librarians and GLSEN.
