So what is “information policy” anyway? Well, as mentioned in earlier posts, it is made up of laws and regulations involving the creation, processing, access and use of information as well as privacy protection. As far as libraries are concerned, the role of the librarian is to protect not only the privacy of the patron but the patron’s right to access information. As Matz states, there is a librarian-patron relationship that is similar to doctor/patient or attorney/client confidentiality, although it is not recognized by law to have privileged status (Matz, 2007). This relationship (and thus this level of confidentiality) works when there is trust between both parties.
Weeks after the 9/11 attacks, the USA PATRIOT Act (USAPA) was enacted, which gave the government the power to monitor and intercept communication in all formats (Matz, 2008). Section 215 of the USAPA became a source of controversy, as it stated that the government can search third party records, including library records. (In May 2011, Congress passed a four-year extension to Section 215, which President Barack Obama signed into law.)
Under this section, the Federal Bureau of Investigation can get information about library patrons from their records. It basically states that the government could retrieve information about you without notifying you, which is a violation of the Fourth Amendment (it protects us against unreasonable searches and seizures). Needless to say, it ruffled some feathers among librarians because it challenged their ethics and their patron’s right to privacy. Libraries across the nation began adopting their own protocols on patron confidentiality and privacy by being more discreet about things like ILL and reserve records, and adopting more drastic measures like shredding computer access logs (Matz, 2008). It is the American Library Association’s Code of Ethics at play here. It is the duty of the librarian to protect patron confidentiality and intellectual freedom.
References
Matz, C. (2008) Libraries and the USA PATRIOT Act:
Values in Conflict. Journal of
Library
Administration. 47 (3/4), 69-87. doi:10.1080/01930820802186399
This is a subject that is of great interest to me as I blogged a somewhat similar piece on the PATRIOT Act and Intellectual Freedom. What strikes me the most is how little control a librarian has if a government official requests a seize of record. I thought of this scenario: A patron of the library pays a visit to research books on the different fertilizers needed for a particular crop -- lets say corn, as his profession is agriculture. While there he also does a Google search comparing different brands of bleach for his spouse. Both actions are harmless and PRIVATE to that library patron. However, the government could view his queries and searches as attempts at making homemade bombs thus demanding the library to divulge that customers home address and personal information to federal officials. This is a serious breach of the library code of ethics that, unfortunately, is out of the librarian's hands. Any act one can do to further attempts at amending the PATRIOT Act is well worth the efforts.
ReplyDeleteI think this is such a difficult subject because, as librarians, we follow our ALA Code of Ethics regarding patron privacy. Section III of the ALA Code of Ethics states that "We protect each library user's right to privacy and confidentiality with respect to information sought or received and resources consulted, borrowed, acquired or transmitted" (American Library Association, 2012a). So what do you do when the government steps in and decides to override everything you thought was right? Like Mary Ellen said, a patron could be searching harmless topics and it could cause some governmental alert. I checked out ALA's website in regards to the Patriot Act and it states that, “The American Library Association (ALA) opposes any use of governmental power to suppress the free and open exchange of knowledge and information or to intimidate individuals exercising free inquiry…ALA considers that sections of the USA PATRIOT ACT are a present danger to the constitutional rights and privacy rights of library users”(2012b).
ReplyDeleteAmerican Library Association. (2012a). Code of Ethics of the American Library Association. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/advocacy/proethics/codeofethics/codeethics.
American Library Association. (2012b). The USA Patriot Act in the Library. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/offices/oif/ifissues/usapatriotactlibrary.
I completely agree that the USA PATRIOT Act is a violation of users' privacy. As stated in the post and in comments, it clearly violates the ALA's code of ethics regarding privacy of the user. Just to play devil's advocate here, how far would you go to protect you patrons' right to privacy?
ReplyDeleteIn an article for Mother Jones magazine, two authors followed the case of a cooperative of library directors in Windsor, CT. One of these directors refused an order from the FBI to release computer usage records as an issue of national security in 2005. The librarians challenged the order as unconstitutional and took their case to court. In 2007, a federal court declared the provision allowing the FBI to access patrons' private information was unconstitutional.
Would you go this far to protect your patrons' privacy? What if it turned out there was a real threat to national security?
References:
Goodman, A. & Goodman, D. (2008). America's Most Dangerous Librarians. Mother Jones, September/October 2008 issue. Retrieved from http://motherjones.com/politics/2008/09/americas-most-dangerous-librarians