One thought on “Double-sized IFAction Round-Up, August 13-26”

• I am glad to see that someone in the library community is concerned and aware of social networking privacy issues.

  When Web 2.0 first came out with ways to use social media to reach library users where they are, everyone jumped on board. As a library science student, we did numerous projects using social media. That was before things took a rather ugly turn of late regarding privacy issues on Facebook and other social media platforms.

  Many of the policies and practices, related to privacy and information sharing, especially on Facebook, are not straightforward. Some of the apps, like photo tagging, are not allowed in some European countries, where it has been determined that the practice violates citizens right to anonymity (https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/03/french-constitutional-court-bans-law-enforcement-use-biometric-data). The interface itself is full of deceptive links, trojans, and malware disguised as content, and private citizens’ facebook content is fair game for insurance companies and federal agencies to track and monitor activity.

  Twitter is not really better as far as privacy goes and their records are also subject to seizure by the courts (https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/08/eff-continues-support-ows-protester-twitter-case-goes). This is the same reason many libraries do not keep a permanent record of their patrons’ transactions in their library databases (http://www.librarylaw.com/publicrecords.html.)

  Some people say they are not concerned about privacy because they have nothing to hide, but that is not the point. I read recently, a society where everyone is tracked is not really free,” and I strongly agree. An urgent wake-up call is needed.
  “Why should we care about perfect tracking? EFF believes that perfect tracking is inimical to a free society. A society in which everyone’s actions are tracked is not, in principle, free. It may be a livable society, but would not be our society.
  EFF believes that perfect surveillance, even without any deliberate abuse, would have an extraordinary chilling effect on artistic and scientific inventiveness and on political expression. This concern underlies constitutional protection for anonymity, both as an aspect of First Amendment freedoms of speech and association, and as an aspect of Fourth Amendment privacy.” (https://www.eff.org/wp/biometrics-whos-watching-you.)

  My question is, as it relates to libraries, shouldn’t we be sure we are steering library users in the right direction? Shouldn’t we be teaching them to protect themselves rather than deliver services without caveat, via social media platforms? Platforms that violate patrons’ civil rights and freedom of information? I include freedom of information because Facebook severely censors posts that interfere with their agenda. They will not allow users to post certain links to applications that filter and block ads (FBpurity), and they delete pages that contain information that help users protect themselves against Facebook’s appalling security, or lack of security policies.

  In a world where rapid change is the norm, I think it’s time to rethink social networking and consider whether the path we are following is really the right path or not. We have a lot more and better options available to us for hosting our own platforms, sharing, and connecting. For a small fee, you can host your own web presence, complete with blog, wiki, forum, email, and applications for chat and more options. Cloud based options are relatively inexpensive, and you and your patrons’ information will be protected instead of misused by private, third party organizations with a questionable sense of responsibility to their customers.

  We don’t need free social networking anymore, to provide interactive services to our library patrons. In my opinion, it will be far better, more professional, and safer, to subscribe to or host our own interfaces on our own computers or on the servers of a reputable service provider. I think we have the responsibility as librarians, to observe the path ahead and lead our users in the right direction by endorsing products that are in fact worth endorsing. As an example, Wikipedia is still not considered a reliable resource and in general, students are discouraged from citing that source in their academic work. Some librarians have traditionally taken a “use are your own risk” approach to Wikipedia. Facebook and other “free” social media platforms are far less reliable, reputable, or informative, and involve far greater risks to the user, and we use them without providing any guidelines for their use.

  Relying on the government to protect your privacy is like asking a peeping tom to install your window blinds. – John Perry Barlow

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.