I’ve been thinking of people’s reactions to technology lately. Even in a crowd of enthusiasts there are several different camps. For example, in the case of wikis, some people think they should be wide open, some think they should be locked down for authorized editing, and some think they should be hidden. The camps may change based on the content available in the wiki, but there do seem to be these three basic groups, and I find this really interesting.
Even though there are portions of our profession who are very “library 2.0″ who focus on keeping things open, there are professional values that understandably run counter to these open source values.
One is that we are a profession that archives. Some librarians’ entire job focuses on the preservation of knowledge. In the case of a wiki, entire sections can be vandalized or wiped out by users. If one of the professional values we have is to preserve information, it’s easy to see why some might not want grant everyone permission to edit or change online resources.
Another value we hold is an opposition to censorship. Librarians typically make stands to fight censorship. I can easily see librarians worried that if wikis were wide open, blog (Flickr, or catalog) comments were enabled, or if anyone were allowed to add posts to a blog, the library staff might be faced with difficult decisions. If users were to put up negative comments, lies, or inflammatory posts, library staff would have to decide if the user generated content should stay or if it should come down. Determining where the line is would be challenging. Any line would mean the library staff would have to come to terms with library sponsored censorship.
So how does a librarian with a “culture of yes” attitude deal with these kinds of issues? I think that in terms of archiving and preserving online information, it’s a matter of software: backing-up, easy restoration, and monitoring of the existing sites. I love that
Dealing with the issue of censorship might be a little more tricky, and a little less software based. I would think the answer would depend on the individual institution. In general, though, I’m a fan of making expectations known in advance. If there were a FAQ section, the organization could explain their expectations and actions that might be taken if illegal material were posted, etc. Of course, it would be helpful if any policies were explained in a positive way (and avoided negativity).
Technorati tag:censorship, community, preservation
Related posts:
Post a Comment