In recent profiles of Justice John Paul Stevens’s legacy, I learned of several of his important contributions to intellectual freedom like copyright, privacy, and the First Amendment.
Libraries want to provide high quality, affordable, safe learning platforms, but that can be challenging. With lots of choices and often confusing terms of service agreements, libraries are asking themselves, “What should we buy?”
Youth need a space where they feel accepted, and the library can be that space.
Facebook’s boundless pursuit of data has broken into your gray matter. Our last stronghold of privacy will be compromised so we can type faster. Seems legit.
The privacy act stipulates that individuals retain ownership of the data they transmit electronically and not service providers or software vendors.
The world continues to change quickly, and I would argue that librarians are uniquely situated to consider the implications of technology changes on our users and society. I think we have an ethical responsibility as keepers of our patrons’ data and educators of the next generation of digital citizens to make this a priority.
By: guest contributor Samantha Lee – LyndaLibrary, soon to be LinkedIn Learning, is planning a platform update that would require library patrons to create LinkedIn accounts to access the resources, rightly prompting privacy concerns amongst Connecticut librarians. By calling attention to the privacy concerns on Lynda/LinkedIn, librarians can help to create a safer environment for patrons and their privacy.
So many great intellectual freedom and privacy events during ALA Annual Conference in Washington D.C. You won’t want to miss a single minute.
By: guest contributor Sarah Hartman-Caverly – The true threats to intellectual freedom on college and university campuses cannot be solved by outside intervention – most especially not by state intervention. In this post, Hartman-Caverly extends criticism of the recent Executive Order on free inquiry by challenging its emphasis on learner data tracking, and questions whether intellectual freedom can meaningfully exist without intellectual privacy.
Those behind the advent of autonomous vehicles would convince consumers that altruism motivates their drive to create robotic taxis. However an analysis of these arguments exposes gross violations of privacy in the name of profit and societal control.