What information policies do libraries generate?
Policies provide an institution with a framework between you and a patron or co-worker.
Libraries divided their collection of media into different broad policies, which included section, reselection, reconsideration, and acquisition policy.
*Selection policy places the materials in the collection, which gets assigned a decision or responsibility. This policy can go through deselecting policy and be reconsidered on it procedures. This policy should ask the following questions how are materials selected and who will select them? This is a way to create goals both short and long term.
*Deselection policy is where items can be removed from the collection.
*Reconsideration policy is where a person(s) can challenge an item in a collection based on its selection policy.
*Acquisition policy assigns items in the most efficient way.
Libraries have created guidance line for their operation procedures through a collection of management. Policies come from are the acceptable use and computer policies, CIPA and Filtering, USA Patriot Act, and Washington State Public Library Policies.
Examples of what libraries take in consideration to create their policies
• what information cannot be accessed
• what information individuals can access
• what information social groups can access
• what information organizations can provide access to
• what information the government must provide access to
• what information the government does not have to provide access to
• what information the government can access about citizens.
Some of the Policies that are created by libraries are.
Questions:
How have these policies affected information access globally?
How have these policies changed attitudes toward information?
How have these policies changed the types, of information citizens seek access to?
http://eduscapes.com/sms/access/policies.html
http://www.mrsc.org/subjects/infoserv/publiclib/libpolicy.aspx?r=1
http://www.ala.org
http://vnweb.hwwilsonweb.com.proxy.lib.wayne.edu/hww/results/results_single_fulltext.jhtml;hwwilsonid=3IUXCY4VUR50FQA3DIMCFGGADUNGIIV0
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
26 comments:
re: How have these policies changed attitudes toward information? and
How have these policies changed the types, of information citizens seek access to?
Trying to measure attitude change and the reasons for it are particularly difficult, according to research I am familiar with. Law and policy are aimed at regulating behaviors, not dealing with attitudes even though policy makers might hope that people would have particular attitudes. Thus, for example, even though a law maker might prefer that people not hold prejudicial views about certain people, s/he would write a law aimed at a behavior (e.g., an employer's discriminatory practice) and not the attitude (e.g., prejudice). It is not, in my view, a good use of time and energy to concern myself with what people believe or what their attitudes are, even though I may have my own preferences (as many of us do). I am concerned when those attitudes get acted upon and become behaviors that may serve to diminish my/others’ rights or do me/others harm. Thus, the imposition of Internet filters (a behavior) may affect a patron’s ability to access some information (i.e., an outcome related to this behavior). How a person feels about this outcome will vary but while interesting, it is not as important as the outcome itself. As I have mentioned elsewhere, policy outcomes need to monitored and evaluated on an ongoing basis. In addition to seeing if a policy has the desired effect or outcome, it is also important to see what else has occurred—both expected and unexpected—which may be neutral or undesirable. To put a policy in place and not monitor its effects is both irresponsible and unprofessional, in my view.
Based in part on my readings for our group’s ‘ethical scenario’ which involved Internet filters in libraries, I am strongly against such measures. Not only do filters subvert freedom of information and one’s access to it, there is evidence in the literature that they do not work. For a good discussion of this topic see:
Nakaya, A. C. (Ed.). (2005). Censorship: Opposing viewpoints. San Diego: Greenhaven Press. The Opposing Viewpoints database is also accessible via the WSU library database. While perhaps successfully screening out some sexually-related or pornographic websites, these filters also screen out (for example) much valuable educational and medical information. Moreover, as many of us have previously stated on discussion boards in this class and elsewhere re: censorship, each person has the right to do her/his own filtering and not have those decisions made by others. In this context I was disheartened to read the following news article (courtesy of ALA’s ifaction listserv) about a Michigan library that appears to be in support of such filters.
“LIBRARY MAY RECONSIDER PORN FILTERS
ROYAL OAK -- Two weeks ago library officials started requiring adults
who want to use a computer longer than 15 minutes to get a library card
or permanent visitor's pass; now they will look into Internet filters
to block pornographic Web sites.
The first change in practice, which went into effect Feb. 18, means
library patrons have to give their name and address to use the 16
computers in the adult lab to do anything more than a quick check of
their e-mail. There won't be anonymous people staring at screens for
one or more hours, according to Library Board President David Palmer.
"There is now a trail and we hear there has been a great cooling effect
from the staff," Palmer told the City Commission Monday.”
http://www.dailytribune.com/stories/030408/loc_localn02.shtml
Just like every organization has its policies, libraries should have their own policies. Information is not always required for positive reasons, thus the should by reservations when it comes document storage. With the many policies it is scary because at some point one wouldn’t know what information they have a right to especially if the policies of any library are not made public. This however, will affect information access also necessary information for positive use code be coded or kept under or with information that should not be released this will leave a gap in the access of information. Also patrons using the library could just totally avoid accessing any government material even for study purposes for fear that they could stumble on something they shouldn’t have. Hence staying away from government information will be making one ignorant of what is going on around them. From an article on Adams County under Sample local Government documents in http://www.mrsc.org/subjects/infoserv/publiclib/libpolicy, the policies in that area are so many the employees could begin to requires necessary information for the organization and not that which is useful. Generally, policies restrict behavior and access to information as every know and tries to stay within their permitted limits.
How have these policies changed the types, of information citizens seek access to?
These policies have affected the information that patrons seek for many reasons, but I will cover just a few. Libraries have to go through a strenuous selection process to see if the book is something that fits their collection. This process could result in the book not being available at the patrons’ neighborhood library. Another reason for the change in requested information is due to the reconsideration policy, which has grown over the years as people are writing books that others do not deem appropriate for general public use. Therefore many books are being removed and challenged in various libraries, making them unavailable. Although library generated information polices are put into place to help the library run smoothly, they also limit what is available for the patrons.
On Feb. 1 a man was arrested at the Royal Oak Library for browsing child p*r*:
http://www.wxyz.com/news/story.aspx?content_id=693476dc-bc5d-4273-a156-3611928940f9
This probably spurred the library's interest in internet filters, and it comes back to the question: How have information policies changed the types of information citizens seek access to?
At the library that I work at, we have filters on the computers and a strict no p*r# policy. I haven't been there that long, but I have only seen one person looking at p*r# and he was booted from the computer. On the other hand, I was talking to a couple of librarians who have worked at MI libraries where the computers are completely unfiltered, and they both said that the absence of filters created a stressful environment at times for the librarians (in other words, it was a very "p*r#y" environment.)One said that patrons would even ask for help using the videos on the adult websites!!!
I am not advocating for filters one way or the other, and I realize that the percentage of people looking at this kind of stuff in a public library setting is relatively low. However, it does happen and can create an uncomfortable environment for both patrons and staff. At the same time, filtered computers can make it difficult for patrons to get access to the information that they need (the classic breast cancer example.)
Correct me if I am wrong, but it is my understanding that by law patrons have to be given a an unfiltered computer by request.
I do not know if information policies change people's attitudes towards information- if anything, I think that information policies are a reflection of those attitudes, at the local level and beyond.
On my library visits, they public librarians indicated that they have filters, as well as a pop up at log-on that allows a user to disbale the filter. They said, however, that 90% of the computers run with filters, because patrons don't opt to turn them off.
Acquisition policies determine what a library will buy and make accessible to users. The rising costs of databases and online journals and decreasing budgets of libraries are limiting what is available to most users because libraries can't afford to buy as much. Perhaps more and more items will be "free" and paid for by advertising or the authors will submit their journal articles to open access. I read where Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences is encouraging their faculty to publish in an open access environment. http://www.fas.harvard.edu/home/news_and_events/releases/scholarly_02122008.html This would seem to benefit everyone except the leftout journal publisher. I am not sure that this would work for "books" as easily?
My feelings are that there needs to be policies just like anywhere else. A library is a public building where any age is allowed to walk in. If porn is allowed on computers than they are exposing young children as well. Children are allowed in all portions of the library and in the library I visit have the computers at the entrance where there is no way to avoid them. I am not saying that people do not have the right to view porn. Just that at a public library it is inappropriate. I am sure where most of us work if you were caught with porn on your computer you would be fired.
I think libraries should look to acquire a wide range of materials, without worrying about offending a portion of a community. People come to the library to seek information. It is difficult for people to make rational decisions without a balance of resources. Libraries should not present one side of an issue. They should seek to find all sides and present them fairly with a range of materials.
I agree with Sylvia. Libraries need to focus on all sides of an issue and respect the search for knowledge that most (hopefully) people have. I can be difficult to encapsulate an issue that has many sides and is possibly very controversial. But it is a challenge that most librarians can handle.
These questions are difficult for me to answer because it seems like acquisitions policy or collections policy is different for each type of library. Therefore, the attitudes towards information is different in different context.
For example, when I did my library visits at the community college I visited it was a priority to provide a collection that went along with the curriculum taught at the school.Also, they increasingly spent more money on technology and electronic sources and less on print. They also reduced the length of time they kept periodicals. The librarian I spoke with thought that this would be a trend among community college libraries. This is exemplified in the acquisition policy for Eastern Central Community College. http://www.eccc.edu/library/acquisition_policy.htm In the policy it is stated that the purpose of the library is to support the mission of the college.
For a public library the policies under which the library functions is different.
At the second library I visited, The Library of Michigan, print sources were as valuable as electronic. They continued to spend money on collections and print resources that would assist their patrons in researching genealogy and Michigan.
I found Catherine's comment about the Royal Oak library very interesting, not so much because they are going to start filtering, but for the change that requires patrons to give a name as well as an address in order to use an internet computer.
First, let me say that I have been in the situation of being an out of town patron at several libraries in the last couple years as I took online classes and accessed them while out of town on vacations. Almost every library asked for ID while I used their computers, and most of them actually gave me a guest card to use in order to access the internet.
This differs from my own library. We allow everyone to use the public computers, and frequently have visitors from out of town who come in to access their email while visiting the area. While we do ask patrons to "sign in" with their first name only. This is more to keep track of who is next than to keep a log of names and addresses. It would be interesting to find out what Royal Oak is doing with their users' names and addresses. Even more important is the fact that this kind of "keeping track" makes it very easy for law enforcement officials to access patron's private information. I am not so sure this is a good idea on Royal Oak's part. Here is the link to the article in the Detroit Free Press:
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080310/NEWS05/803100345
Also mentioned in the article are other libraries in the area and their views/policies on filtering, as well.
When dealing with the issue of filters, all libraries should have policies and procedures in place but not neccessarily the same exact policies. Different libraries serve different needs. The policies and procedures should fit the needs of the individual library and their patrons.The New York Times had a interesting article on the use of filers.
www.nytimes.com/2003/06/04/politics/24INTE.htmnl?ex=1371787200&en=a466eefeb73cc86r&ei=5007
The article was titled " Justices Back Law to Make Libraries Use Internet Filters" by Linda Greenhouse June 24, 2003.
The article mentioned that the Supreme Court upheld a federal law that requires all libraries to install porn filters on all computers providing Internet access as a condition of continuing to recieve federal subsidies and grants. The ruling was opposed by many librarians because of it direct conflict with First Admendment rights.
It is also important to note that the statute authorizes, but does not require librarians to unblock Internet sites at the request of adult users nor does it specify what filter system to use. This gives libraries some freedom to determine what policies and procedures they want to put in place. Another interesting point was made by Chief Justice Rehnquist " The Constitution does not guarantee the right to acquire information at public library without any risk of embrassment."
I think that information policies created by libraries automatically affect the information that patrons can access. A library is not able to acquire every book that comes on the market, so there has to be some picking and choosing. Obviously you are going to choose something that will be used rather than waste room on your shelves for something that may be diverse, but never used. I hate the idea of a library having information all geared toward the same type of people, but you have to think about space and circulation issues. I currently work at a dollar store and we would never stock something that we know would not sell. Should we be doing this in a library just to make the collection more diverse? I still struggle with this in my mind, but I need to think logically about it before making these types of decisions.
On the subject of signing up for a library card to gain more than 15 minutes of time on the computer...
I think the major benefit of this is that the library is encouraging people to use its resources. They already have a card, so maybe they will grab a book or a movie on the way out with a flyer of upcoming events. If the problem is that you are requiring them to leave personal info to use the computers, what is the harm? The Feds would have to have a reason to subpoena those records before a "violation of privacy" occurs. If the patron is required to sign in, that is where the violation would occur. The readings indicated that anything in plain view including computer screens, sign up sheets and physical descriptions can be accessed by Federal agents. Just as you shouldn't leave evidence of a crime sitting on your lawn, if you are planning to commit a crime, it's probably not a good idea to hang out in a public library where anyone can see what you are up to.
As to the filters, I am not quite sure how I feel about them at this point. I plan to get a job in a library this spring, but I have no experience with filtered computers. I don't use library computers for anything except figuring out where to find a book while I am there. I would hope that an adult who is looking up information for legitimate,some may say "moral" purposes such as breast cancer awareness in a library would be able to ask a librarian to turn off the filters, OR ask a librarian direct him or her to a non-filtered computer, OR go find a book or a magazine article (with or without the help of a librarian)to expand his or her results.
re: How have these policies changed the types, of information citizens seek access to?
Without a doubt if a library establishes a collection policy or computer use policy or anything along that line, they are entering into a contract with the user that allows them to use their services (i.e books, computers) but at the same time be restricted from certain types of information that the library has deemed unacceptable for some reason or another.
Granted, in some cases overzelous policies can dramatically decrease the breadth of information, but for the most part libraries created different policies to help the user understand why something may not be on the shelf, or why the can't access a certain site.
In my opinion they function like specific mission statements for individual aspects of a library.
As Melissa has mentioned, I think that each type of library has specific information policies to apply. In placing policies each library has to take into consideration its institution’s policies in the first place. As Academic and school libraries belong to an institution they have to take into consideration this institution’s policies and try to build upon policies that serves the best its patrons. Many other factors are to be considered when placing policies as well, for example as Tim has mentioned budgeting is an issue for the acquisition policies when selecting materials to buy for the library.
I think that policies can have negative and positive effects; it depends on the policy and on the patron. By placing the Patriot Act which the libraries have to implement, some patrons now fear access to information. When doing research about chemical harmful products for an academic mere aim, most researchers will refrain from conducting this type of research because they just fear to be questioned by the government, so this act has affected researchers in the most part of it. Concerning the filtering issue, this policy has positive effect on children in protecting them from accessing inadequate materials; whereas if all computers in a public library are filtered this issue would affect the adults negatively as not all filters function effectively, they do block sites containing adequate information.
How have these policies affected information access globally?
It is a lot harder for patrons to find information that is needed. Patrons can only go so far with research on a public computer.
How have these policies changed attitudes toward information?
Patrons get frusterated when they cannot have access to information. They do not look to find more because it may take a little more work than just googling something.
How have these policies changed the types, of information citizens seek access to?
Citizens look for whatever they can find knowing most things are blocked by public computers. Patrons seek to access information that is easy to find.
Policies of selection, deselection, reconsideration and acquisition have a profound impact on what types of information to which citizens seek access. Quite simply, patrons cannot access that which is not there. A patron's quest for knowledge is limited to the resources provided to them by the library, and therefore, if the library, through its policies, chooses to omit certain types of information, the results of the patron's search will also omit such information. Selection policies are certainly an essential part of how a library is operated - it goes without saying that for a library to try to include all the information in the world is a ridiculously futile endevor. However, it places a very heavy burden of responsibility upon the librarian to ensure that the information that they do include is diverse enough to satisfy the needs and desires of the public.
Collection and acquisition policies by their nature limit what patrons in one particular library may access, but they're necessary in order to allocate limited resources.
Having a well-thought-out reconsideration policy is important because patrons should be able to feel comfortable opening a dialogue about materials they find problematic for whatever reason. I'm not suggesting that removing items is the solution, but libraries should make it clear that they value public input and are willing to consider it.
I think that most patrons/people believr thy have a right to any information that is out there. When libraries does not have information or the access to information, they are considered irrevelant. Libraries must be diligent in publizing their policies so patrons can understand what to expect.
One of the most popular policies that libraries generate are filters or restrictions to porn. We live in a country that proclaims liberty to all however when liberty can cause harm or expose people, especially children to derrogatory images policies need to be in place for the greater good of the community.
One Kent County library restricts internet access on computers that are not in plain view of the librarian (American Libraries, 2007). I think this is a great idea and allows total freedom on some public computers at the same time protects from potential incidents of accessing porn.
The library in the article that I sited restric`ted access to social networking sites in an effort to lesson the negative gand activity the library has been a victim of. It is not clear how the two are related in this case, however overall I think this plan is maore beneficial than harmful.
Patron Abuse Prompts Trial of Social-Network Filter. (2007, September). American Libraries, 38, 41. Retrieved from Wilson Web database. (200724404614055)
As with all institutions, libraries, too need policies. One must understand that the intention of policies are to support the good of all. I see how filters limit the freedom of patrons, however there is a reason for them. I know that as a librarian I'm supposed to stay unbiased and keep my own views to myself, however I think that this is difficult for all.
It's important that policies are frequently reviewed and updated. With technology being updated every second, we must make sure that the policies supports these changes.
The topic of internet filtering has been coming up quite a bit in my first semester! I am from ann arbor where the adult public terminals have two browsers, one filtered and one non-filtered, where almost everyone uses the non-filtered. I have seen patrons looking at porn unapologetically, yet it is not up to the librarians to monitor their internet usage. The only case where a user may be asked to leave a computer is if another patron complains that the site they are looking at is offendeding them in some way.
Here is an interesting twist on the federal government’s policies. Not only is the issue of privacy a concern to libraries, but the role they must play and the expense incurred are important to consider. Part of the post 9/11 polices the Congress “considered new bills that would expand governmental surveillance powers” and required the libraries to maintain records for extended periods. The ALA protested arguing, “that new technological requirements--that certain types of information be retained in databases for extended periods of time--should not be imposed on libraries. These ‘may have substantial unintended consequences that affect libraries' ability to provide core user services.’”
ROGERS, MICHAEL & ODER, NORMAN. Library Groups Find Flaws in New Antiterror Legislation. Library Journal (1976) v. 126 no. 18 (November 1 2001) p. 18
I think that many of these policies have the positive effect of making patrons more conscious of their choices and the privacy that protects them. For example, learning about the Patriot Act opens one's eyes about what information someone may be gathering about you. While it often seems that policies protect the library (and they often do), it is important to acknowledge that these may also protect the patron. However, knowing about a policy such as the Patriot Act might discourage a patron fron accessing information that may be important to him or her, which is a negative effect.
On the issue of library internet freedom, I am curious how my classmates feel about the issue of crime. Most of us focus on filters as a way to eliminate porn or other objectional material, but there are many other ways that the interent may be misused. If a patron is using the internet at a public library to commit crimes such as selling illegal goods on eBay or something similar, there is no filter to block him/her yet this seems like, in many ways, it could endanger more people than looking at pornography. I sense that most of you are against having patrons accountable for what they view on library computers, but remember that what you view at home can be collected and reported by your ISP. If an individual is using library computers to commit a crime, does he/she deserve protection? Opinions?
Most libraries I've been to do ave restrictions on what can be viewed, however asking a librarian to turn off the filter has always worked for me. Now I'm wondering if tis is because I'm an adult. I wonder if a child could ask to get the filter taken off?
The log this week has made me wonder if we have a right to knowledge or if it's just a privilege that can be taken away. I think we should have a right to knowledge.
Post a Comment