One of the statements that stood out to me most during this weeks discussion was from Andy Yen’s TED Talk.  He talks about how many of us remember life before The Internet, how a new generation is currently being taught to share everything online, and that 20 years from now the definition of privacy will be completely different from how we remember it 20 years ago.  It’s an interesting notion to think about.  Will we really give up aspects of our privacy? Are we still going to expect to live protected, private lives while still being able to connect and live online?  I’d like to think that privacy is still an inherent right that we all will expect and fight for, but after some discussion with a classmate on Twitter I’ve realized that some of that privacy we expect is already being forgotten.

Our discussion on Twitter centered around not really being that bothered by invasive data collection for marketing.  Tailored ads are so forcefully shoved in our faces at any chance an app or website can get that I actually feel like I’ve gotten really good at ignoring them.  It’s obvious someone is trawling my shopping habits, and web searching.  I have Modcloth ads on almost every page I visit.  I don’t see them though, unless I’m really looking.  Should I be more concerned about my habits and searching being used to “curate” personalized marketing? Probably.  I’m more concerned with someone hacking into Microsofts database and stealing my credit card info from their XBox data, or being apart of a large scale Target hack like the one that happened last holiday season.  Sometimes data collection is helpful.  It’s nice to see “If you bought this, you might like this” on Amazon.  Sure, sometimes it makes me buy something I wasn’t looking to, but I like to think I’m fairly budget savvy.  If it’s something I truly don’t need or shouldn’t buy, I probably won’t.

So where does this leave libraries?  I’m also taking LIBR256 Archives and Manuscripts this summer and this week we were also talking about privacy.  It’s made me realize libraries and archives are sort of between two juxtaposing positions.  On the one hand, we love information! Give us all the information! Libraries and archives are all about the freedom to access and disseminate information.  On the other hand, we are also sworn to protect people’s privacy and personal information.  I really don’t think it’s true that people are going to continuously get more lax about data collection.  It’s still a serious issue and nobody wants to feel like their personal life has been invaded, let alone deal with the repercussions of having health, bank, or other potential life altering info stolen.

Promoting content from library programs and services can sometimes involve patron’s stories, ideas and photos. There are also some people that would prefer that their photos and names never be used on social media. And this is totally their decision and one that libraries and other organizations that use social media absolutely need to uphold to. Everyone has a right to not have their information posted online. 

For public libraries that wish to share photos of programs that are happening, it’s important to have a photo release. This photo release would allow those attending the program to opt in or out of having their photos used online. Should a child’s picture be taken in the program, it’s up to the parent or guardian to sign the waver for the photo to be used. If the waver isn’t signed, it’s permission denied for posting the photo. This form of consent is a way for patron’s to maintain a level of privacy that they wish in regards to their photos being used on social media sites and possible publicity publications as the library sees fit. 

This week we're looking at big data, privacy, and what both mean to libraries and librarians in this social media optimized, highly technological world in which we live. The question asks whether libraries should collect, store, and utilize big data in service to our communities. I have mixed feelings about this.

Jennifer Helfrich (2015) defines big data as "data sets that are extremely large and complex," kinda obvious there. However, she goes on to explain, albeit implicitly through her examples, that this data includes personally identifiable information, such as name, email address, phone number, and geo-location, as well as photos, emails, and social media posts (Helfrich, 2015). That's a lot of information to collect about a single person. We, as consumers, tend not to think about the applications we use as collecting all of this information from us and using it or selling it or whatever. Every time we hit "agree" or "accept" to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy without actually reading it, we're consenting to an entity using our information for their own purposes. Often these conditions and policies are so vaguely worded that even if we were to read them, we wouldn't truly understand what they were saying anyway (Scherker, 2014).

It's different for libraries, though. And if it isn't, then it should be. We, as librarians, have been told time and again that we adhere to the American Library Association's Code of Ethics. This means that we have a responsibility to protect the privacy and personal information of our users, as well as the library institutions commitment to intellectual freedom and fair representation. How can we do either of those things if we are collecting, storing, and using customer information? Is that not the complete opposite? We want our users to trust us not to do such things. We are the library, a community center, not a faceless corporation.

On the flipside,  I can see where collection of some user data could be useful. I don't mean all that which is traditionally defined or thought of us big data, and indeed, it still feels as though it would go against the very nature of the library. But. Libraries already track circulation statistics for materials. Items go out, they come back, they have circulated. They have been used. Normally, we have no idea what the item was, who checked it out, if they liked it, none of that.  Some ILS' have a "reading history" feature where users can opt-in and keep track of everything they've checked out. What is interesting to me, and makes me think that this could be a good thing, is that users think we do this automatically. Some are confused and downright disappointed that we don't keep track of what they checked out after they've returned the item.

I propose that we do automatically track user check outs. It doesn't have to be the title. It could be just the author's name or the genre. This way, when the user comes looking for a readers' advisory, but can't remember the last book they read, we can look at it, and continue the interaction. Such data collection could also lead to a collection that better reflects the service community. Of course, we can't leave the entire collection up to user whims and publishing trends, but the usage statistics of a collection based heavily on concrete user wants would be a strong indicator of value added to the community. There would be challenges, to be sure. One major objection I can see already: How do we ensure that users personally identifiable information is protected while simultaneously tracking their reading habits? I don't know yet. Another issue that would need to be addressed: The creation of a policy/procedure/guideline and related press release for the collection and use of this data, as well as something that states explicitly that the library will never sell, rent, share, or otherwise utilize the personally identifiable information of users beyond the bounds of current usage. Tis a very fine line to navigate.

What I worry about, though, in tracking reading habits is that people will feel less free and able to read what they want. They may feel as though we are watching them and will only pick socially acceptable books like Hamlet, rather than what they want to read, which may be Fifty Shades of Grey. I would hate for that to happen.

Helfrich, J. (2015). Plugged in or tuned out?: What do our students know about big data? Knowledge Quest, 43(4), 76-77.

Before this week, I had limited, if any, understanding of big data. Today, it seems like the more I learn about big data, the more questions I have. Big data is something is so BIG that it’s difficult to wrap my brain around. However, the question of whether or not libraries should use big data to serve patrons seems to me a very clear No. Here’s why:

Big data is an invasion of user privacy. Users generally have no knowledge that their information is being tracked, analyzed, and stored by companies. If they do know, they usually don’t know to what extent it is happening. The ALA Code of Ethics requires that librarians “protect each library user's right to privacy and confidentiality with respect to information sought or received and resources consulted, borrowed, acquired or transmitted” (ALA Code, 2008, Principle III). The ALA Library Bill of Rights declares that “Lack of privacy and confidentiality has a chilling effect on users’ choices. All users have a right to be free from any unreasonable intrusion into or surveillance of their lawful library use” (ALA Privacy, Rights, 2014, para. 5). The confluence of these two statements seems to emphasize that for libraries to use big data is an invasion of patron privacy and is therefore unethical.

As an employee of a public library, I have had more than one patron approach me requesting a list of the books they’ve checked out. Each time, I’ve had to explain that keeping records like that is a breach of patron confidentiality and therefore unethical. Thankfully, our OPAC has a feature that enables patrons to keep track of their check-out history privately when they log into their account. (If this feature is compiling big data behind the scenes, I can’t say, but it’s something to think about in the future.) However, my point is, if retaining a simple reading history in a patron’s record is considered unethical and a breach of confidentiality, how could using big data be okay? It seems obvious to me – It can’t. 

As I see it, the question of whether or not libraries should use big data boils down to what is more important: adhering to the ALA Code of Ethics and Library Bill of Rights, or improving the user experience.  If being ethical is your thing, then don’t use big data. If improving the user experience is your thing, then perhaps using big data can be justified. For me, ethics supersedes the user experience in this situation. The user experience can be studied and improved in more ethical ways using local data gathered through transparent means.  

References American Library Association. (2008, January 2). Code of ethics of the American Library Association.  Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/advocacy/proethics/codeofethics/codeethics