Libraries Should Help Your Information Stay a Little More Private

Yesterday I received my copy of the latest issue of a journal I subscribe to. On the front cover is an abstract image with the caption "under surveillance." As one might imagine, this is a nod to the ongoing government surveillance scandal (I think at this point, the term "scandal" is appropriate). So far, I've kept my discussions on this issue to verbal conversations with my fellow citizen, but the image on the cover of a scholarly journal about librarianship led me to wonder: "what role do libraries play to maintain patron privacy and what role should they play?"

To be sure, this is a topic that has been discussed at great length, and not just in the recent past. And for those that know and understand librarianship, this comes at no surprise; after all, as this ALA explanation of privacy shows, patrons have an right to privacy implied in the Library Bill of Rights (a document that defines policies all libraries should follow). However, in light of the recent revelations of the NSA's surveillance activities, one's actual level of privacy engaging in any activity is now suspect. This thought process is what spurred me to ask my question.

An interesting result of the NSA "revelations" has been seen in the consumer market. Products are now being evaluated and/or promoted based on their ability to protect consumers from NSA surveillance. The latest iPhone, for example, has a fingerprint reading security feature that stores the fingerprint information on the phone, not on Apple servers. This means that Apple will never have that data, so it would never be able to turn that data over to the government. John McAfee, a name known in the computer industry as the developer of a popular computer anti-virus software, has also announced a new product in the works that will supposedly protect people against NSA surveillance. Since libraries are big advocates for their patrons' privacy, what effort are they putting into keeping their patrons' information as private as possible?

For answers, I turned to the policies of three libraries I am familiar with. Two of the three are public libraries (Alameda County Library and MCFL), and one is an academic library (SJSU). I use all three fairly regularly. I was surprised to find no mention of patron confidentiality or privacy policies on the policy section of the Alameda County Library website (which is worrisome since this is the one I use the most). The MCFL policy was quite explicit in what information the library collected, how it was used, and in some cases how long it was kept. The SJSU library also has a confidentiality policy that outlines what information is collected, including what specific confidential information is collection, but no mention is made of how long the information is kept (which can imply it's kept indefinitely). What's interesting is that the MCFL and SJSU policies are years old; one was first instituted in 2003, the other in 2006. Existing library privacy/confidentiality policies are well-established.

So where does this information leave us? Well, we can assume that many libraries (but not all) are aware of and take pains to inform their patrons what information the library collects and how it can be used. Both available policies do explain that they will release information required by subpoena or court order, which put them in the same boat as many other law-abiding companies and organizations. In other words, there may not be a lot of "extra" protection that libraries give their patrons.

Except when they do. The MCFL policy notes the length of time that the library will keep certain kinds of information. On the list of information collected are materials that the patron has checked out, the information on who last checked out an item, transaction details for fines owed and late items, and transaction details on fines paid or waived. Each of these pieces of information is only kept for a limited amount of time, not indefinitely. If a patron returns an item on time and that item is checked out twice more (or up to six months pass before the item is checked out again), there is no record to link that patron to the item he or she borrowed; for a popular title, that information will disappear quite quickly. Because the library doesn't keep the information, the library would be unable to pass it on to, say, any government agency asking for it.

If we're going to talk about best practices, I would suggest that MCFL's policy become the ideal for libraries. I understand that libraries have to keep statistics on things like circulation, web usage, and other measures of use, but there are ways for the library to collect and maintain that information anonymously. Logically, MCFL has to be doing so to some extent since transaction details are deleted after a set amount of time, and if MCFL is managing other libraries probably are as well.

Libraries can be and should be the model for transparency and privacy. At the very least, all libraries should be openly providing access to their policies on what information is being collected from patrons. If such a policy does not exist, why not and how soon can that be recified? More libraries need to adopt of level of confidentiality and refrain from keeping patron information indefinitely. This will allow patrons to assume some anonymity and safeguard their privacy.

And now I will (temporarily) step down from my soap box.

The Importance of Multicultural Libraries

A recent post in a mailing list within the profession that I subscribe to noted a book, Beyond Article 19: Libraries and Social and Cultural Rights, that was published in 2010 [1]. The book is organized into chapters that address various social and cultural issues as they manifest within libraries and the profession, which often refer to the Declaration of Human Rights. I was lucky enough to find that my university provides electronic access to this book so that I could delve deeper.

Have you ever actually read through the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights? It’s a set of thirty articles outlining all rights that are considered “universal” and are theoretically guaranteed to every individual (though this doesn’t always happen in practice, as we see in many international news stories—like what’s happening in Syria). For those of you that have not read the actual articles in this document, anyone who has read our country’s Bill of Rights and the Constitution would see a lot of similarities in the Declaration of Human Rights. Most people would recognize Article 19 from its language alone, if not by its name: “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers” [2]. There are also some things that are spelled out very clearly there that we might not think of, simply because we are lucky enough to live where a lot of the social and cultural oppression does not happen. Some of these other mentioned rights include having “freedom of movement” within your country of residency [3], the right to marry with free and full consent [4], the right to “form and to join trade unions” (yes that is specifically mentioned and puts an interesting twist of some of the anti-union activity happening in various parts of the US) [5], the right of “rest and leisure” [6], and the right to “freely…participate in the cultural life of the community” [7].

One chapter in particular, “Cultural Rights and Language Rights in Libraries” caught my eye [8]. It connects the right to freely practice a culture with language rights. If you think about it, language is vital to the social, religious, creative, and other types of activity within a culture. It is how people within the same culture not only communicates with each other but also shares and celebrates parts of the culture with each other, and how those outside the culture can come to know and understand the various aspects of the culture. Say you wanted to learn--really learn--about Italian culture. A logical place to start would be by learning the language because that would allow you to better understand things like the songs, stories, traditions, food, and society of that culture. So one can argue that by guaranteeing the right to practice a culture, you also guarantee the right to know and speak the language of that culture. You can even go a step further by saying such guarantees also secure the right to equal information access in that language. And this is where libraries come in.

Libraries have reincarnated themselves into different forms during different periods of our recorded history. However, one underlying theme has always been libraries as the source of information resources (which themselves have also taken many forms). Nowadays, libraries and librarians seem to provide a much more varied selection of services than during any other time of the libraries’ existence; but the libraries’ role of information source is stronger than ever. So if they are to successfully cater to those that rely on the services they provide, they must become multicultural and multilingual especially in those areas of the country and the world that are particularly diverse. And, as the author of the above chapter notes, we must realize that with the extreme changes in technology which continue to redefine and reconfirm our global and pluralistic society that libraries are no longer only serving those within physical proximity. They can just as easily field questions from individuals located hundreds or thousands of miles away.

So what must libraries and librarians do to ensure that cultural, language, and information access rights are ensured? The author of this chapter suggests that it means including resources of other cultures and organizing them in ways that are culturally appropriate (thereby increasing accessibility). It means making libraries truly multicultural not just in resources, but in programming and staff as well [9]. These are ideas that, while not new, are seemly gaining more attention and momentum--as evidenced by the ALA weekly newsletter that is emailed to me, as well as trends in topics I see on blogs, discussion boards including those on LinkedIn groups, and conference offerings.

The final lines of the above chapter are quite poignant: “A human rights approach [to libraries] acknowledges that all cultures are valuable and all cultures produce, often in their own languages, knowledge that contributes to our understanding of humanity. Our collections need to restore people’s beliefs in their names, in their language, in their environment, in their heritage of struggle, in their unity, in their capacity, and ultimately in themselves” [10]. I don’t know if libraries as a whole can yet be considered truly multicultural based on this excerpt, but they are certainly moving in the right direction. And to ensure cultural, language, and information rights, it is vitally important that they do.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[1] Edwards, J. B. & Edwards, S. P. (Eds.). (2010). Beyond Article 19: Libraries and social and cultural rights. Duluth, MN: Library Juice Press.

[2] United Nations. "The Universal Declaration of Human Rights," Article 19. Retrieved July 3, 2012 from http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

[3] United Nations. Declaration of Human Rights, Article 13.

[4] United Nations. Declaration of Human Rights, Article 16.

[5] United Nations. Declaration of Human Rights, Article 23.

[6] United Nations. Declaration of Human Rights, Article 24.

[7] United Nations. Declaration of Human Rights, Article 27.

[8] Albarillo, F. (2010). Cultural rights and language rights in libraries. In J. B. Edwards & S. P. Edwards (Eds.), Beyond Article 19: Libraries and social and cultural rights (pp. 85-111). Duluth, MN: Library Juice Press.

[9] Albarillo, F. Cultural rights and language rights in libraries, p. 104.

[10] Albarillo, F. Cultural rights and language rights in libraries, p. 111.

Illegal Immigrant vs. Naturalized Citizen

Forgive the perhaps disjointed writing here. This is a complex issue (with roots that go much deeper than the level of discussion here), and one perhaps I'll explore more in future posts. For now, please bear with my jumbled thoughts.

As librarians, I'm sure most of us recognize that our libraries are nothing without the communities they serve. Our goals, our purpose, our reasons for being guides to the vast information resources (and other things) that our public requires and requests would be for naught without the individuals that make up our communities. And these communities come in all shapes and sizes, rural and urban, predominantly one ethnicity and greatly multicultural, rich and poor, haves and have-nots. Immigrants from a large number of countries are found in many of these communities, and many libraries don't make any bones about their immigration status; they are given the same access to resources as the rest of the community. So it is in this spirit of brotherhood (for lack of a better term) that I was happy to hear about President Obama's declaration on the hold of young illegal immigrant deportation. 

The issue started to make me think about what an illegal immigrant is. If you really examine this "class" of person (as it seems they have become), there are not a whole lot of differences between them and naturalized citizens other than a piece of paper declaring them American. Both illegal immigrants and naturalized citizens come to this country hoping for a better future for themselves and their families. In some ways, I think that some illegal immigrants may want this ideal future (the American Dream) more than those that become naturalized citizens. Many illegal immigrants work jobs that "regular" citizens would never consider, even in a state of unemployment, but these people do it because they don't see another choice--and maybe even such work is better than they would have had in their native countries. (This puts me in mind of an article I read awhile back looking at agriculture in Alabama and the response farmers had to the ban on illegal immigrants passed in that state last year.)

I find it sad that only the government's declaration of "legal" or "illegal" can create such a social gulf between "us" and "them" and essentially put them in a social caste that is considered the lowest of the low. It seems that "illegal immigrant" is synonymous with "having no basic human rights." These are people, even though many of us would dismiss them. They deserve consideration at the very least, especially when our eyes would glaze over and and our gaze purposely slide over them. How did this group of people become so stigmatized? When did that seemingly unanimous unspoken decision happen? I'm trying to put myself in their position and find I can't even come close to imagining what it would be like to be told "you're not wanted; you don't belong here" my whole life.

And before you stand up and say "No, agreeing with Obama's executive decree is wrong!" please remember that President Obama is providing young illegal immigrants--those who were brought here by their parents--this option his declaration describes, as long as they have conducted themselves as law-abiding citizens. Personally, I would rather have these people here contributing to our society in valuable ways than many of the naturally-born miscreants that participate in violent crime. How does it make sense to keep the latter (and spend public money on those that find their way into the penal system) and throw out the former? I would ask everyone to remember that our country was literally built on the backs of immigrants, illegal and legal alike--from the Africans forced to work the fields in the South, to the Chinese and Irish given back-breaking work building the railroads. Heck, even the Pilgrims immigrated here. We are a nation of many people with many backgrounds and cultures. We are virtually just as likely to see celebrations for Cinco de Mayo or Chinese New Year as we are Independence Day (and I don't hear people decrying their un-Americanness).

So, in closing, I guess my feelings about this issue can be summed up in two words: have compassion. Many of the "illegal immigrants" here are just trying to make the most out of this Land of Opportunity, as are we all.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Author Note: This was first written last week in the initial wake of President Obama's declaration. I've added more of my personal reflections since.