Tag Archives: Inclusion

Digital Social Justice: A Natural Library Mission

The theme of this year’s World Social Justice Day is ‘A Call for Social Justice in the Digital World’.

The focus is timely – the last decades have seen digital technologies play a more and more central role in the economy, shaping the way we work, and the type of work we do.

As the United Nations’ own note for this year’s commemoration underlines, this has brought new opportunities for employment and entrepreneurship which, previously, would not have been imaginable. It highlights that those who are left offline therefore risk enjoying fewer opportunities, while others move further ahead.

However, there are also concerns, notably around platform-based business models and their impacts, both on competitors and their own employees or contractors. Within the workplace, tracking of employee activity raises the prospect of greater surveillance and reduced wellbeing.

These too risk driving inequalities between companies and between individuals by giving some greater opportunities than others.

As such, the UN makes a case for efforts to define responses and actions, firstly to tackle the imbalance between those who are off- and online, but also to address challenges that give more possibilities in the digital world to some than to others.

But what then about libraries?

As this blog will argue, efforts to build digital social justice today can take inspiration from the long-standing work of libraries to promote information social justice (a term explored in the next section). Furthermore, our institutions are well placed not only to contribute to practical efforts in the field, and to support further reflection.

 

Information Social Justice

While it may not often be talked about in these terms, the work of libraries to provide universal access to information is could be described as promoting information social justice.

This work is about giving everyone the opportunity to access the information they need to fulfil their potential, either through collections within a library, or through document supply.

It is also about giving everyone the possibility to use information effectively, through the application of copyright exceptions that would otherwise put many works out of reach, and through the provision of skills and support.

Yet it is not just a question of opening the doors to all, but also taking proactive efforts. Public libraries in particular have a mission, as set out in the UNESCO-IFLA Public Library Manifesto, to make particular efforts to ensure that everyone benefits.

This work supports employment and entrepreneurship for all, as set out in our research piece for this day two years ago, alongside a wide variety of other economic, social, cultural and civic goals.

Digital Social Justice Implementors

Increasingly, the work of libraries to promote information social justice takes place through digital means of course.

Connecting libraries to the internet and opening access to users has allowed our institutions to provide access to a greater volume of information. At the same time, it has also required further work to help users improve their ability to navigate through what is there.

This can stretch from helping people to look for work online and prepare digital CVs, to holding coding classes that can open the way to new jobs. The need for more advanced information literacy, in particular to understand how information is created, shared and presented, is clear.

Crucially, these services are provided in a way that looks to respect the principle of universality, with efforts to ensure that no-one should face unjustifiable barriers to accessing and using digital tools to improve their own lives.

The role of libraries in delivering on effective connectivity and digital skills strategies has already been recognised by many governments. Nonetheless, this is not to say that the situation is perfect everywhere. There is always space to share ideas, innovate and improve practice in order to reach further.

Joining the Debate

In addition to their own efforts, a key determinant of libraries’ ability to contribute to digital social justice will be the choices made by governments themselves.

The experiences – and values – of libraires can have much to contribute in discussions around how the internet should operate in order to promote the ability of everyone to participate actively in economic, social, cultural and civic life.

IFLA has engaged on these questions for a number of years, with statements on privacy, net neutrality, the right to be forgotten, digital literacy, internet shutdowns and beyond. In each case, there has been an emphasis on how to ensure that restrictions on universal access to information are minimised, protecting the capacity of all people to draw on information without unjustified restrictions.

In each case, poor decisions can leave those with fewer resources exposed to greater exploitation of their personal data, a narrower range of materials available (at reasonable speeds), and less ability to exploit the opportunities the internet presents.

Libraries also bring in extensive experience of acting as ‘platforms’, providing access to works by others in an equitable fashion. To do this, they must negotiate questions around balancing human rights, respecting the law, and accountability.

In doing so, they rely on professional judgement and ethics that could contribute much to discussions today around the role of platforms.

Conclusion

With digital technology advancing rapidly, the combination of measures needed to ensure digital social justice – from personal connectivity and skills to wider regulation – are evolving, even if the goals of social justice are lasting. This in turn requires a process of ongoing learning and action not only amongst governments, but also among all relevant stakeholders.

In this process, libraries have much to offer, both in delivering on fundamentals such as internet access and providing a platform for skills development, and in contributing experience and expertise to wider discussions.

Multilingual Libraries: Approaching Language as Identity and Inclusion

Multilingual learning, including mother tongue instruction, is a vital element of equitable access to education and opportunity (see UNESCO Languages in Education). The IFLA/UNESCO Multicultural Library Manifesto encourages “linguistic diversity and respect for the mother tongue” as part of the mission of multicultural library services.

But are we truly fostering inclusive, multilingual environments through our practices?

For this year’s International Mother Language Day (21 February) on the theme: “Fostering multilingualism for inclusion in education and society”, we encourage readers to take a careful look at their library’s collections and services through the lens of language as identity and language as inclusion.

Beyond Utility: Language as Identity

Language is more than a way to share ideas, thoughts, and knowledge (although these are important aspects). It is the culmination of a shared past – an indicator of community and a means of experiencing cultural identity.

In a globalised world, this results in a balancing act between the values of a lingua franca and of preserving the nuances of localised, Indigenous, dialectal, and otherwise marginalised languages. While there is great utility in having a shared language for cultural exchange, knowledge transfer, and international relations, language is about more than just utility.

Preserving a language means preserving and passing on the cultural memory of those who speak it. Losing a language is a loss to cultural identity, and therefore preserving language is a necessary element of cultural preservation.

This theme was explored in depth through the case of Indigenous languages during 2019’s International Year of Indigenous Languages. For more, take a look back at our series on how libraries preserve and promote Indigenous languages, which examines the impact libraries can have for endangered Indigenous languages.

Accessing mother tongue languages

Beyond endangered languages, global migration caused by lack of economic opportunity, climate change, conflict, and other factors leads to groups finding they must speak a language other than their mother tongue to navigate daily life. IFLA’s Library Map of the World collects multiple cases of libraries helping migrant and refugee communities acquire necessary language skills to adapt and integrate into their new homes. See SDG stories from Germany and Canada for some examples.

However, as highlighted above, language is about more than utility. Having the ability to access one’s mother tongue can greatly impact one’s experience of identity. This requires language support to go beyond helping users acquire necessary new language skills; it should also enable people to use their own language.

In their paper presented at the World Library and Information Congress 2019, Keira Dignan, Hannah-Lily Lanyon and Rebecca Wolfe of ECHO for Refugees shared their experience providing mobile library services to refugee camps and marginalised communities in and around the Athens area. Click here to read the paper in full.

While providing support for learning English and Greek, the authors expressed the importance of also offering users access to resources in their mother tongue.  They stress that this is vital for providing “a piece of home, for community building, and for survival” and well as for ensuring children who may have missed formative school years gain language ability in the native tongue.

To treat language truly as identity, rather than as utility, consider which groups in your community of users could benefit the most from accessing mother tongue resources.

A Benefit for all Learners

Fostering an environment where all languages are valued and valid has a benefit for all learners – those that are bi- or multilingual as well as those that are not.

The pedagogical strategy known as translanguaging encourages educators to refrain from placing value on one language over others – especially in multicultural and multilingual learning environments. It refers to the way multilingual speakers blend languages and allow their mother tongue to inform the way they learn new languages and express themselves.

In practice, this means that everyone in a learning environment is empowered to express themselves in whatever language – or blend of languages – they feel comfortable. It can also mean that all participants strive to incorporate words from other languages into their daily use and are made welcome to share aspects of their native language with others.

The EAL Journal describes this process as being concerned with communication rather than with only learning the utility of the language.  To do this effectively, it requires everyone in the learning environment to become co-learners – growing multilingual respect organically.

Librarians, especially those working with multicultural communities, may be interested in exploring this approach in their practice. For more of an introduction to this concept, refer to this article from the EAL Journal: What is Translanguaging?

Language and Power

In all the previous examples, it is critical to examine the power structure behind multicultural environments that is expressed through the languages we speak. Language has social implications that intersect with systemic inequalities relating to class, national origin, race, and privilege.

In their article, the team from ECHO for Refugees stress that practicing multiculturalism leads to examining inequalities on the global and local scale, especially in terms of power and access. They report experiences working with refugees who themselves place a higher value on English language than their mother tongue, as English is perceived to have higher marketability.

This topic is explored in depth in the article Multilingualism, Neoliberalism, and Language Ideologies in Libraries from the online journal In the Library with the Lead Pipe. Author Ean Henninger explores the intersection of power and value dynamics with the languages of available library collections and services. The following passage is especially interesting:

In supporting specific languages and giving them power, libraries set conditions for who can engage with the library: who can access resources, who feels included, and who sees themselves in collections and services… If a library treats a given language only as an object of study, something that resides in individual books, or something that must be supplied to meet demand, not as something that is intertwined with culture, race, gender, and access to power, then the picture is incomplete. (Source)

The article advises against the commodification of library users and information services. This can be expressed in such seemingly innocuous ways as policies determining which resources are eligible for collection and a focus on customer service which avoids examining social responsibility.

It is vital to consider multicultural and multilingual library services not only through their potential benefit for users, but also as actions taken in direct response to, and under the influence of, inequalities in power and access.

Although individual action cannot solve large-scale, systemic inequalities, acknowledgement of these structures and creating inclusive space to address them is a step in the right direction.

Taking Action Towards Inclusion

How can libraries truly address the language needs of their communities? Perhaps start by examining the current multilingual resources and programmes you have available. Here is a short checklist that may be helpful to get you started:

  • Do your resources and programmes accurately reflect the language needs of your community? How do you know for sure?
  • Have you made assumptions on the language(s) your users speak? Could some communities not feel comfortable or empowered enough to make their needs known?
  • Have you approached multilingual collecting and services in a participatory manner? Could there be more avenues for user input?
  • Do users feel empowered to speak in their mother tongue (or other languages) in your spaces and during your programmes? Could you increase their comfort through practices, such as multilingual signage?
  • Have you considered the different dialects or variations used by local communities in collection development?
  • Is providing language support or translation an extra task for employees who are multilingual? Are they compensated for this additional labour?

This is only a start – we are interested to hear how you provide multilingual services that meet the needs of your community! Share feedback in the comments below.

 

The 10-Minute International Librarian #39: Seek diverse viewpoints

IFLA works to build a strong and united global library field.

But this doesn’t mean that it should be uniform. We benefit hugely from our diversity, and all the different experiences and perspectives this brings.

It allows us not only to find new solutions to existing problems, but also to identify areas for action that we might not have been aware of previously.

By doing this, we can improve our ability to power literate, informed and participatory societies.

There is some great work already taking place both at the national level, and within IFLA, notably in the Section on Libraries Serving Multicultural Populations.

This helps us both to think about how libraries themselves can serve diverse user groups, and how we can build diversity within our own profession.

So for our 39th 10-Minute International Librarian Exercise, seek diverse viewpoints.

Identify a key processes or decision points, and think about how you could ensure you are open to this.

Who could offer you new ideas, but is not currently being heard? What is holding them back? What can you do about it?

Think about the way you are seeking ideas, and how you can make additional steps where needed.

Of course, putting your ideas into action will take more than 10 minutes. It will be a learning process. But it is important to start!

There are lots of resources out there on how to do this better – share your suggestions below.

Good luck!

 

This idea relates to the IFLA Strategy! 4.3 Increase, diversify and engage our membership.

As we publish more ideas, you will be able to view these using the #10MinuteInternationalLibrarian tag on this blog, and of course on IFLA’s Ideas Store! Do also share your ideas in the comments box.

Library Stat of the Week #35: Where there are more libraries offering internet access, being out of work is less likely to mean that people are also offline

Over the past weeks, we have looked at data around digital divides, and to what extent these cross over with other potential divides in society – rich and poor, women and men, old and young, and those with higher or lower formal qualifications.

It is valuable to look at this because the results help understand to what extent the internet can act as a bridge across divides, or rather deepen them further.

Ideally, access to the web should help those who are disadvantaged find new opportunities and information in order to improve their own lives, as well as those of the people around them.

However, where access is lacking, the fortunate – those who can use the internet – can get ahead, while those without drop further and further behind. This has been abundantly clear during the COVID-19 pandemic, with children lacking internet access unable to take part in education in the same way as their better connected peers.

It is also the case for those facing unemployment. People seeking work can do so much more easily with access to the internet, both to find openings, and to develop skills or access support.

People who are retired can also risk being cut off without internet access, for example limiting contact with friends and family, governments services, and eHealth possibilities. Older people may also feel less confident online, and feel the need for additional support.

In both cases, libraries can provide a great way to ensure that everyone can get online and make the most of the internet.

This blog therefore looks at digital divides between those in work on the one hand, and those who are unemployed or retired on the other. Once again, data on internet use comes from the OECD’s database on ICT Access and Usage by Households and Individuals, while data on libraries offering internet access comes from IFLA’s Library Map of the World.

Graph 1: Employment-Related Digital Divides

Graph 1 looks at the state of the employment-related digital divide, for countries for which data is available. In almost all countries, a greater share of people in employment have used the internet in the last three months than those who are unemployed.

Only Denmark, Luxembourg and Switzerland buck the trend. In the Czech Republic, Hungary, Korea, Slovenia and Slovakia, the gap is over 20 percentage points.

Meanwhile, in no country are retired people more likely to use the internet than people in work, with the gap reaching over 40 points in Chile, Lithuania, Portugal and the Slovak Republic.

Graph 2a: Employment-Related Digital Divides and Internet Access in Public Libraries (All Countries)

Graph 2a crosses these figures with those for the number of public or community libraries offering internet access. Each dot represents a country, with the number of public or community libraries offering internet access on the horizontal (X) axis, and the gap in shares of the population using the internet (employed minus unemployed (blue dots) or retired (red dots)) on the vertical (Y) axis.

As with previous weeks, putting together the figures for all countries suggests that there is a positive correlation between the number of libraries offering internet access per 100 000 people, and the size of the digital divide – clearly not an encouraging result!

However, as we have seen in previous weeks, it is worth breaking out the results for Central and Eastern Europe, given the particular history of these countries

Graph 2b: Employment-Related Digital Divides and Internet Access in Public Libraries (without Central and Eastern Europe)

Graph 2b – using data from countries outside of Central and Eastern Europe – therefore shows a very different picture, in line with what we have seen in previous weeks. Where there are more libraries offering internet access, the digital divide faced by people who are out of work or retired, compared to their in-work peers, tends to be smaller.

Indeed, it appears that for every additional public library per 100 000 people offering access, the digital divide for the retired falls by 1 percentage point, and that for the unemployed falls by 0.55 percentage points.

Graph 2c: Employment-Related Digital Divides and Internet Access in Public Libraries (Central and Eastern Europe)

Graph 2c repeats the analysis for countries in Central and Eastern Europe for which we have data, again indicating that where there are more libraries offering internet access, divides are smaller.

 

As always, the analysis carried out here cannot show causality – only correlation. However, it supports the argument that it is in societies with more libraries offering internet access that people who most need to access the internet face smaller barriers to doing so.

With COVID-19 risking exacerbating divides in societies, this is a powerful point to make in underlining why maintaining and broadening internet access through libraries matters more than ever.

 

Find out more on the Library Map of the World, where you can download key library data in order to carry out your own analysis! See our other Library Stats of the Week! We are happy to share the data that supported this analysis on request.

Library Stat of the Week #22: Where there are more public and community libraries, foreign-born, foreign-language migrants experience a smaller literacy gap compared to native-born, native-language peers

In our Library Stat of the Week mini-series on libraries and equality, we have looked so far at economic inequality, educational equality, and gender equality.

Through different blogs, we’ve explored the interaction between these and numbers of public and community libraries and librarians.

One factor which all too often correlates with poorer outcomes is immigrant status. In addition to difficulty in getting used to a new culture and language, or trying to get qualifications recognised, they can also face discrimination in different dimensions of life.

There are various ways in which libraries can help, from helping newcomers to feel at home and promoting tolerance and inclusion more broadly in society. A crucial way they can make a difference is by supporting literacy by helping newcomers.

To do this, we can use data from the OECD’s Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competences (PIAAC), which assesses literacy, numeracy and problem-solving capabilities. In carrying this out, the OECD also collected data about whether respondents were native- or foreign-born, and whether they spoke the primary native or another language as a mother tongue.

We crossed this data with numbers of public and community libraries and librarians (and related staff) from IFLA’s Library Map of the World.

Public/Community Libraries and Library Workers vs the gap in average literacy scores between native-born and foreign-born adults

In a first step, we looked at the ‘gap’ between average literacy scores between native- and foreign-born adults, as shown in Graph 1.

Each dot represents a country for which data is available, with higher scores on the vertical (Y) axis indicating a wider gap (and so worse outcomes for foreign-born adults compared to native-born ones. Figures for the gap are adjusted to control for age, gender and educational level.

The results are relatively inconclusive, with little correlation between numbers of public and community libraries and library workers, and the gap.

However, this is to forget that in many cases, a large share of immigrants come from countries where the native language is the same, or at least where the language of the welcoming country is common.

Public/Community Libraries and Library Workers vs the gap in average literacy scores between native-born/native-language and foreign-born/foreign-language adults

In Graph 2, we can address this by looking at the gap between native-born, native-language adults, and foreign-born, foreign-language adults. The difference is significant, with a much stronger correlation between greater numbers of public and community libraries and smaller gaps.

 

Indeed, for every 10 extra libraries per 100 000 people, the gap in literacy falls by 5.82 points on the PIAAC scale. There is a less obvious correlation with the number of librarians.

 

 

As is always noted in this series, there is a difference between correlation and causality, and this analysis does not make it possible to assess what other factors may be at play. As ever, more libraries (and librarians) may be a symptom of a society that has invested more in general in integration and inclusion.

 

It is nonetheless the case that where there are more public and community libraries, foreign-born, foreign-language migrants tend to face less of a disadvantage in literacy levels compared to native-born, native-language adults.

 

This could be explained by the possibility that libraries offer to develop language skills, either simply through access to books, or through programming (although the fact of no correlation with the number of librarians may weaken this point).

 

The fact of much weaker correlation in Graph 1 does at least underline that the potential of libraries as drivers of inclusion in general, beyond language, is not being realised. This is certainly an area where more can be done.

 

Find out more on the Library Map of the World, where you can download key library data in order to carry out your own analysis! See our other Library Stats of the Week! We are happy to share the data that supported this analysis on request.

New Opportunities: Libraries and the United Nations in 2019

Libraries and the United Nations in 2019

As those who were able to attend the relevant sessions at the World Library and Information Congress in Kuala Lumpur heard, 2019 will be a big year at the United Nations for libraries. There will be a focus on Sustainable Development Goals that are particularly relevant for our institutions, and key steps will be taken towards a review both of the overall 2030 agenda, and the indicators used to measure progress.

But it’s also an important year for the UN itself, with new structures now in place. These also have implications for the way libraries engage with the SDGs at the national level. This blog sets out some of the key moments and opportunities in the coming year.

 

A High Level Political Forum Focused on Core Library Business

Each year, the UN selects a number of SDGs as a focus for the High Level Political Forum. These also shape the preparations for the event, and even voluntary national reviews.

This year, the focus is on education (SDG4), employment and growth (SDG8), equality (SDG10), climate change (SDG13) and strong institutions, including access to information (SDG16). These are all areas where it does not take too much effort to build understanding of how libraries make a difference to individual’s lives and societal progress.

These themes will each be the subject of a ‘thematic’ meeting. While education has already taken, place, SDG 8 will be the subject of a meeting on 4-5 April in Geneva, Switzerland, SDG10 of one in Accra, Ghana on 27-28 March, SDG13 will be addressed on 1-3 April in Copenhagen, and SDG16 is provisionally on the agenda on 3-5 April in Rome, Italy.

These will discuss key challenges and progress made, and set out recommendations for how the world can do better and acheive the goals set out in the 2030 Agenda.

There will also be five regional meetings: for Europe and North America (21-22 March, Geneva), Asia-Pacific (27-29 March, Bangkok), Arab Countries (16-18 April, Beirut), Latin America and the Caribbean (22-26 April, Santiago), and Africa (16-18 April, Morocco, tbc).

These give the chance to take a regional perspective, looking at the specific issues in different parts of the world, as well as facilitating peer learning. They are also great opportunities to meet with national officials leading on coordinating SDG implementation.

IFLA will be looking to take the chance to be heard at the High Level Political Forum – and the thematic and regional meetings. We hope that local libraries will also be involved! But all libraries can also contribute by reminding national SDG teams of the contributions they make in these areas.

We’ll be in touch with ideas for how to do this!

 

A Review of the 2030 Agenda and Indicator Framework

Four years on from the agreement of the SDGs, the original text agreed by member states provided for a review of the agenda as a whole. We are now at that stage, offering an opportunity to think again about how work around the SDGs is organised and implemented.

In parallel, an expert group made up of governments and representatives of various UN agencies will hold a consultation about updates to the set of indicators used to measure progress against the SDGs.

In both of these processes, it will be important both to defend what is good about the SDGs – not least the reference to access to information – but also work to improve things. Civil society organisations – not least IFLA and library associations – could have more voice, and voluntary national reviews could be more inclusive. We also need better indicators of access to information across the board.

A key point will be the SDG Summit, held in September as part of the UN General Assembly, which will set out a political declaration, present a number of voluntary commitments and reaffirm the 2030 Agenda as a whole.

We’ll be in touch at key moments in the year to explain how you can help convince your governments of the need to promote the changes libraries need to make the 2030 Agenda better still.

 

New Contacts, New Possibilities

The UN is a huge organisation. In addition to its core elements (including the Sustainable Development Division within the Department of Economic and Social Affairs), there are many agencies and other bodies linked to it, not least the UN Development Programme (UNDP).

Many of these do work in different countries, operating offices, supporting projects, and raising awareness.

In order to promote greater consistency in this work, the UN agreed to give more power to the ‘resident coordinators’ – the top member of staff in each country, to help them coordinate better. This is part of a broader reform strategy,  covering internal organisation, responsibilities and funding.

The resident coordinators will have a particular role in focusing support efforts linked to the SDGs (taking this over from local UN Development Programme representatives), and will also have more formal powers and funding, making them an even stronger potential contact for library associations.

Especially in countries where there are a number of UN projects in place, the new resident coordinators are potentially very useful contacts for libraries and library associations. They will be happy to know that local institutions are promoting the SDGs, and could help ensure that libraries benefit from projects aimed at implementing them.

You can find details of the coordinator in your country – and other relevant contacts, by clicking on the map at the bottom of the UN country activities page.

 

2019 will be a year of opportunities to underline the value of libraries. We will only need to make sure we are ready to seize them. IFLA will work with its members to ensure that this is the case.

 

You can find further information on libraries and the SDGs on the IFLA website. See in particular our briefs about Voluntary National Reviews, and Data and the SDGs,  our timeline, and our webinar from September 2018 (in English, French and Spanish).

In order to get involved yourself, take a look also at our toolkit, our poster ‘This Library Supports the SDGs’, and our infographic setting out all of the SDG targets where access to information is implicitly or explicitly mentioned. You can find some great ideas for advocacy around the SDGs in the slidepack from our session at WLIC 2019, and look out for our ‘10-Minute Library Advocate‘ guide coming very soon!

Living in Interesting Times – Three Key Debates in Information Politics

Libraries and the politics of information in 2019

Information has long been political – who has it, who should have it, and how can it be used to shape decision-making. However, it is only relatively recently that this has been recognised.

On the philosophical side of things, much comes from the work of thinkers such as Michel Foucault, who explained the power that comes from organising information in specific ways (‘knowledge is power’). On the more practical side, the emergence of the internet has given a practical focus to broader reflections on how information is created and shared.

It therefore makes sense to think about the politics of information – the discussions and disagreements that take place around key issues. These questions are particularly key for libraries, as central stakeholders in how information is accessed, shared and governed.

2018 has seen a number of key debates come into focus, with further developments expected in 2019. These relate to whether information should be privatised or made publicly available, where privacy should triumph over access, and where free speech should give way to public order concerns.

This blog will offer a short introduction to each question, and relevant examples of legal and policy discussions which will shape information politics in the coming year.

 

Privatisation vs Public Availability of Knowledge

Knowledge – at least in the form of books or other documents – was long subject to constraints both on producers and users. These helped avoid widespread copying, but at the same time allowed users some flexibility in what they did with the written knowledge they held.

The expense of owning a printing press meant that the number of people who could publish was limited (although of course not enough to prevent calls for copyright to be invented in 1709). At the same time, once a book or newspaper had been sold, it was easy enough to share it with others or use it for research or other purposes.

Therefore, while the concept of copyright was intended to give the writings contained in books and other documents the same status as physical objects (in terms of the possibility of owning them), it was only ever an imperfect solution.

Digital technologies have weakened these constraints. It is far easier to publish (or copy) and share works than ever before, but also to place limits (through a mix of legal and technological means) on their uses. In other words, it has never been easier to provide universal access to knowledge, but at the same time, it is also simpler to make the knowledge contained in a book or other document private, with all access and use subject to licences.

These new possibilities have created a gap in legal provisions in many countries, given that there had, previously, been no cause to make rules. With this has come a sense that laws also need to be updated, rather than leaving things up to the market or the courts. This is the underlying reason for the ongoing European Union copyright reform, but also elsewhere.

Specific questions raised in this reform, as elsewhere, include whether people involved in teaching should be able to use materials to which they have access, whether researchers and others should be allowed to carry out text and data mining, and whether libraries should be allowed to take preservation copies.

There are also questions about whether the platforms which allow users to share materials should place the protection of intellectual property above the right of their users to free expression.

2019 is likely to see some sort of conclusion to discussions on these subjects in the European Union, South Africa and Nigeria, as well as key steps forwards in Canada, Singapore, and Australia.

 

Protecting Privacy vs Giving Access

The idea of ‘ownership’ of information is not only associated with intellectual property rights. Increasingly, it also comes up when we talk about personal information – anything that says anything about a person.

Once again, the idea that people have an interest in information about them is not new – there have long been laws on libel which allow individuals to act against writings that are unfair or defamatory. Rulers have also been prolific users of laws against sedition or lèse-majesté. However, such provisions have tended to be limited to the wealthy and powerful.

Here too, digital technologies have changed things by allowing for a much greater potential to collect and use information about people, be it for advertising, security or other purposes. They have also – for example through search engines – made it much easier for ordinary people to access information that might otherwise have been forgotten or too difficult to find.

With this, the idea of a right over information about you has emerged in a number of privacy and data protection laws around the world. The primary focus tends to be on data gathered by companies, with justifications running from a desire to understand advertising choices to enabling customers to shop around between service providers.

In parallel, security concerns have tended to see greater powers given to governments in the types of data they can collect and use, as well as limitations on the transparency obligations they face.

2018 saw the entry into force of the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation, and similar rules emerge in a number of US States and Latin American countries. There have also been new security rules applied giving governments new powers to gather data on suspected terrorists (as well as many others).

2019 may well see more similar efforts, as well as new efforts to take advantage of new powers over personal information.

 

Protecting Free Speech vs Tackling ‘Dangerous’ Content

A key way in which the political value of information has long been recognised is through the efforts made to control free expression. Ideas and writings deemed to be dangerous to political, economic or social goals, for example through calling for insurrection, infringement of copyright, or simply because it is criminal, have long been the subject of attention by governments.

It is true that the right to free speech is a crucial one, but it is not absolute. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights notes that all rights can potentially be limited when this is necessary to fulfil the rights of others. As regards the right to equality, there is explicit mention of the importance of combatting incitement to discrimination.

More recently, the way the internet has developed has both made it easier for people to share and spread ideas (dangerous or otherwise). It has also involved relatively well defined actors and channels – search engines, social media platforms, internet service providers – with key powers over what is shared. Through their own actions – or actions they are obliged to take – there is a possibility to exert much greater control over what can be said and shared than when someone opens their mouth.

We come across this debate in discussions around concepts like ‘fake news’, terrorist content, hate speech, criminal content, and to some extent copyright infringement. In each situation, there is content that is clearly illegal and clearly legal. But there are also often grey areas, where judgement and nuance may be needed.

The problem is that the solution often proposed for identifying and blocking such content – automatic filtering, brings its own challenges. There are issues that go from the practical (are they good enough?), to the political (without incentives to protect free speech, do they risk ‘accidentally’ blocking legal content?), and human rights-related (should rights be given and taken away by a machine?).

At the same time, human moderation is expensive (in particular if done properly, by people with knowledge of relevant cultures), and can cause serious psychological damage to the people doing it. The costs are likely too high for smaller actors.

Clearly, this is a particularly difficult problem in information politics, not helped by cross-over with other areas of politics. This can make it hard to promote proportionate or nuanced approaches.

There is legislation in a number of jurisdictions which seeks to crack down on terrorist content and copyright infringement through (explicitly or otherwise) automatic filtering. Some have sought to ban ‘fake news’ (a highly dubious step), and others have put pressure on internet platforms to do the same, creating incentives to take an ever tougher line on content. With public pressure growing, major internet companies seem set to implement ever more conservative approaches in order to avoid blame.

 

What Implications for Libraries?

As highlighted at the beginning, libraries are key actors in information politics. They are central – both practically and symbolically – to the idea that everyone should have meaningful access to information.

A first priority is to defend this core idea. Too many are still offline, too many lack formal education or the possibility to learn throughout life, too many cannot find the information they need to live healthily, find work or start businesses, or to engage in public life.

Libraries are also unique, as public, welcoming institutions, with a clear social interest goal, rather than a focus on profit. Nonetheless, this status does not spare them from the effects of decisions taken in relation to the three major debates set out above.

They clearly depend on limitations on the privatisation of knowledge in order to do their jobs, but need a system that allows writers, researchers and others to keep on producing. They need to protect privacy (key to giving users the sense that they can seek and share information freely), but must also resist sweeping restrictions on what materials they can collect, hold and give access to.

And while they understand the need to act against dangerous speech, they know from long experience that managing information is complicated and requires skilled judgements based on expertise and values – something that a machine cannot replicate.

While it may not always be popular – or easy to explain – libraries will need to set out and defend the importance of a balanced approach, one that allows for meaningful access to information for all, not just in 2019 but long into the future.

 

This blog is based on a presentation initially given at the Eurolib conference in Brussels on 12 November 2018.