Over the last few weeks, I have been thinking a lot about the role of “trust” in hyperlinked environments (in general) and the implications for libraries. Since I work with teens (but I am not a parent myself), I wanted to learn more about how parents and teens are negotiating “trust” issues in the hyperlinked world.
According to Pew Research (Anderson, 2016), it seems that parents are much more likely to “monitor” teens online behavior than not. One statistic I found interesting was that most parents were more comfortable “checking” the websites, social media, and phone calls/texts of their children than using parental controls or engaging in deeper discussions about online behavior in hyperlinked spaces.
Pew Research reports that have documented low levels of trust in sectors that Americans associate with data collection and monitoring, the new findings show Americans also have exceedingly low levels of confidence in the privacy and security of the records that are maintained by a variety of institutions in the digital age.Madden, M and Rainie,, L. (2015). American’s attitudes about privacy, security and surveillance.
As Madden and Rainie (2015) document, very few adults have any trust in the ways that advertisers, social media companies, and the government protect personal records–from online chats to financial documents to cell phone logs. So then, is it really surprising that parents are more likely to self-monitor teens than use parental controls. So I began to ask, what about libraries? How seriously do libraries safeguard patron records? In the coming years can the protection of privacy in the Library Bill of Rights withstand in the new information landscape?
Diving deeper, I found a 2017 Pew study on the importance of “trust” in “healthy” online environments and how no one is exactly sure what will happen in the next few years…will people abandon social media? Will most accept a high level of insecurity as the price of being online? Will new technologies be invented to make everyone feel safer?
While researching this reflection, I came across a new term–Data Dignity–in a TED Talk by Jarrod Lanier. It seems reasonable to expect that librarians will be employed to ensure “data dignity” and make sure that information is not only accessible but also “trustworthy”? Just this week I had a distraught patron come up to me afraid that his American citizenship had been sold to Korea based on something he had read online (it hadn’t). For him, the library was a trusted and safe place to reveal his vulnerability and find answers.
If librarians are to retain high levels of public trust (something that we should be protective and proud of), we will have to make sure that hyperlinked environments keep “trust” and “transparency” central to its role in community building.
Lastly, I was happy to learn about The Trust Project, which developed transparency standards and”trustworthiness” indicators for news and over 100 news organizations have signed on and agreed to abide by these standards. If the topic of “fake news” interests you, you will want to listen to a fascinating podcast with Stanford’s social media expert, Jeff Hancock, and Director of the Trust Project, Sally Lehrman, as they examine what we can do to rebuild our collective grasp on the truth.
Anderson, M. (2016). Parents, teens and digital monitoring.
Madden, M and Rainie,, L. (2015). American’s attitudes about privacy, security and surveillance.
Rainie, L. (2016). Privacy & Information Sharing
- Reflection #2: Storytelling, Open Offices and Lefties
- Emerging Tech: Automated Laptop Kiosk for Rural Branches