Jenny,
I have found that Infoseek tends to bring up more hits that are "undesirable." Altavista also brings up a great deal, but almost none if you use the Boolean searching in the advanced search. HotBot also seems to avoid those kinds of sites with the Boolean searching.
--Bryan M. Carson
Bryan M. Carson, J.D., M.I.L.S.
Reference/Computer Services Librarian
Hamline University Law Library
1536 Hewitt Avenue
St Paul, Minnesota 55104
Phone: 651-523-2063
Fax: 651-523-2435 / 2236
bcarson@gw.hamline.edu
http://www.hamline.edu/~bmcarson
*********************************************************************
"Library Science is the key to all science, just as
mathematics is its language--and civilization will
rise or fall, depending on how well librarians do
their jobs."
--Robert A. Heinlein
*********************************************************************
All opinions expressed are my own and not my employer's.
All original content (c) 1998 Bryan M. Carson. All rights
reserved.
>>> "Wu, Jenny" <JWU@CDHKK.com> 10/28/98 3:58:21 PM >>>
I am also a First Amendment protector. But, lately, I've been brought
up short.
Maybe it's the search engine I'm using (Infoseek) but I swear that no
matter what I look for I get several "undesirable" sites. "Nude
celebrity photos" seems to be a common one that came up when I was
looking for material on disability discrimination. I think the
pay-for-view sites are getting very inventive about tagging their sites
to generate more hits. I used to trust my son not to look for
pornography but now it seems like it comes looking for him.
The real problem with this for us as law librarians is the "junking" of
the Internet. If attorneys want to spend their free time (ha!) looking
at dirty pictures on the Internet, I don't care. But when they are
trying to conduct legitimate research but keep running into trash, they
might give up on the Internet as a source.
Jenny Wu
Curiale Dellaverson
San Francisco
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 14 2007 - 20:49:59 PST