Ethical Issues in Information Technology

Citation

Hannabuss, S. (2002), "Ethical Issues in Information Technology", Library Review, Vol. 51 No. 1, pp. 45-59. https://doi.org/10.1108/lr.2002.51.1.45.14

This issue starts with a super article by Randy Diamond and Martha Dragich, on professionalism in librarianship. They are both at the Law Library at the University of Missouri‐Columbia School of Law and they know their business. The debate on information ethics is patchy, a mixture of moralising platitude and practical compromising, so it is good to have such good sense. They argue that people talk about malpractice, but actual cases for librarians are few. They probe into what a profession is, whether there is an information profession against which to define malpractice, and whether intermediaries can be held liable in tort for a breach of duty of care which causes negligent fault and leads to damages. They say that minimum legal requirements do not inspire high performance, and codes of ethics are aspirational devices aiming at maximum, not minimum, service standards. From there, they ask us to revisit and re‐examine the core competencies of information professionals and the core values they are based on. Telling comparisons with lawyers and pharmacists are made – for example, the more professionals take on (or pass themselves off as), the higher civil litigation tends to be. Increasing emphasis on Internet resources, and fast‐moving IT resource management, is upping the ante for the professional all the time.

This is the kind of discussion readers will most readily take to. It easily crosses national boundaries and cultures, and will have resonance for professional librarians around the world (in fact wherever this excellent journal is read). Wengert is a philosopher at the University of Illinois, and contributes a wide‐ranging discussion of being an information professional. He throws in a lot, possibly in order to ensure, as editor, that nothing is missed, but it is good for all that: ethics and censorship, search engines and virtual libraries have added to responsibilities of intermediaries and disseminators, privacy may be based on rights but for the professional it needs to be based on virtue as well. Professionals have to make choices about what is beneficial and harmful, however much they believe information and their own role are neutral. His approach shows, too, how so many ethical discussions in this field swing between practicalities, norms, rules, rights, professional decisions, and contractual expectations. Very much an editor’s paper.

It is good to see any work by Robert Hauptmann, the editor of the Journal of Information Ethics, and author of Ethics, Information and Technology: Readings (1998). His piece maps out the new challenges of IT and pinpoints ethical implications. His main case is that legal strictures may only seem to work, and many of us appear to believe in cultural sensitisation and commitment, but do these really work either? The Diamond/Dragich and Wengert papers go a long way to analysing why not. The other contributions are more mixed. A good piece on plagiarism and the librarian’s role in it (some good reasons for why it is growing and on software to combat it), a wide‐ranging piece on global information justice and the work of bodies like the Unesco InfoEthics Round Table, and a short history of the information ethics course at the University of Pittsburgh (influential in its field). Other contributions are rather off target – general chats on the credibility of Internet resources and on links between information, autonomy and community, and the truism count is pretty high there.

Library Trends is a well‐established professional journal, and its themed issues reach a high standard. Wengert’s issue here has real strengths, and the references throughout prove a particularly interesting and topical listing of sources worth consulting and collecting. It proves, too, that this is an inter‐disciplinary field and that some of the best work is being done, not by librarians, but by others. This takes us back to Diamond and Dragich’s point at the start: is IT really a “profession” with a coherent professional base? Questions like that are leading many of us to look hard at core competencies and core values. About time. If you have the $25, get it, if you can afford more (as an academic library), become a regular subscriber. They know their business, these people.