Libraries are the repositories for humanity's knowledge; they are our past, our present, and our future. The information available within the confines of a library must be accessible to all people, regardless of wealth or status. Today, libraries are much more than storehouses for books and include many other forms of electronic data. Retrieval requires specialized knowledge, and database searches that can be quite costly. Who will pay for them is an extremely important question. With the rise of modern technology, the logistics of the workplace changed forever, new rules were needed to govern behaviour, and to develop procedures for librarians on the front lines of the Information Age. As Hans Jonas states in The Imperative of Responsibility, "modern technology has introduced actions of such novel scale, objects, and consequences, that the framework of former ethics can no longer contain them" (Jonas 1984,34). This essay will endeavour to give an overview of the most profound ethical dilemmas facing libraries and librarians, and try to ascertain if Lee Finks' concerns are still valid today. In preface, it will be stated that the issue of confidentiality is so important and fundamental in any discussion of ethics, and its promotion, maintenance, and preservation the custodial duty of every library employee, that it will be considered an underlying and presumed practice.
In today's world, the ethical dilemmas faced by librarians and information professionals are numerous. There is a growing interest in the topic of workplace ethics because the evolution of modern technology has changed the manner in which humans interact with each other and their environment (Jonas 1984,17). In The Recovery of Ethics in Librarianship, Richard Severson states that:
Technological innovation, for example, is enabling us to create "brave new worlds"... But automated environments are unfamiliar worlds. Our old intuitive habits of evaluation, which are adequate for determining what is best in traditional worlds, are inadequate in new and different settings (Severson 1995,13).
It is imperative that ethics are considered in libraries, since it is often only librarians who have the skills needed to access information from these new databases. Jane D. Schweinsburg stresses that it is critical that information professionals share their knowledge with patrons. If not, an impenetratable rift will develop between those who have the power to obtain information and those who do not (Schweinsburg 1995,331). Incorporated with the latest technologies come questions of user fees and the problems associated with fair and equal rights to information for all levels of society.
In 1991 Lee W. Finks wrote about the need for librarianship to develop a new code of ethics and in 1995, the ALA did just that. A perusal of the code leads to the conclusion that perhaps all of his concerns were not dealt with. Essential to Lee W. Finks' thesis is the belief that a code of ethics for librarians and information professionals most not be a hollow statement written to satisfy the public or library boards. It must be the embodiment of the principles and convictions that librarians historically hold dear, and must "focus on the way we do our work and whether or not we perform in a way that can honestly be called professional" (Finks 1991, 84). Furthermore, as Johan Bekker points out, since society judges a profession by its individual members, all members must follow a clearly defined set of ethical standards (Finks 1991,85). In particular, ethical issues related to selection of materials and intellectual freedom should be carefully considered by librarians (Finks 1991,89).
The entire area of intellectual freedom hinges on the assumption that individuals choose the path that their inquiries will take, but this is often a false assumption "how each selection is made in the process of providing information involves a value judgement" (Schweinsburg 1995,34). Librarians often decide the direction that an inquiry will take and therefore it is necessary that librarians continually strive not to let personal judgements interfere with their professional activities. Invariably, the client has no way to judge whether the librarian has acted unethically (Finks 1991,85). Librarians must set aside their prejudices and suppress any personal attitudes that could destroy the validity of an institution that must have as its basic underlying principle: the social obligation to allow access to all perspectives. This has serious and considerable significance in the selection of materials.
In Professional Awareness of the Ethics of Selection, Jane D. Schweinsburg addresses the issue of selection in libraries and contends that "the fact that librarians must examine and select the materials for their collection may make them de facto censors" (Schweinsburg 1995,34). Bekker stresses that selection must be free of censorship and undertaken for library users, not based on any personal preferences (Finks 1991,87). Hauptman correctly points out that these decisions are becoming more important considering the rising price of books and other materials, and the continual budget cuts faced by libraries today. He cautions librarians to avoid censorship and duplication of reference materials (Hauptman 1990,17). Monetary resources are even more precarious now, since so much has to be spent to keep up with modern technology and society's demands in libraries. What are libraries' responsibilities toward society?
In reference work many ethical conundrums are faced every day, and depending upon how they are dealt with, they can have some serious repercussions for individuals and for society overall. Robert Hauptman brought some of these issues to the forefront when he undertook his experiment to obtain information on the ways reference librarians respond to questions of an ethical manner (Hauptman 1990,15). In 1975 he visited thirteen libraries, asking the reference librarians to provide him with information for building a bomb, that would enable him to blow up a suburban home. Not one librarian refused to help fulfil his request. Herein lies the dilemma for the women and men who work the reference desks of our libraries: do they blindly serve clients, discounting any moral obligation, or is it their primary duty to think of the collective 'good'?
Hauptman calls it the "dubious professional commitment to dispense information" (Hauptman 1990,15). If there is any reason to suspect foul play or that any physical harm could come to anyone by the giving of information, then the onus is on the reference librarian to refuse to provide information - "... whenever there is a direct conflict between professional ethics and societal good, the latter must take precedence" (Hauptman 1990,16). Johan Bekker has decisive views concerning where librarians' priorities should lie, stressing "that the professional's first ethical imperative should be altruistic service to the client" (Finks 1991,85). Nevertheless, he contends that in view of vocational ethics (which take precedence), librarians' duties fall to society first (Finks 1991,85). If a librarian's code of ethics has clear-cut guidelines stipulated, any information query can be denied with justification. In Information Ethics: Freedom, Democracy, Responsibility, Martha M. Smith observes that from the early years of the Library Journal, ethical dilemmas ranging from how librarians should answer legal questions, to wartime issues regarding information about the 'enemy', were the subject of controversial debate (Smith 1993,7). There will always be perplexities for reference librarians to work their way through, and decisions made to establish to whom reference librarians are accountable.
Accountability includes concern for society, but also whether individuals are being treated with respect and in an ethical manner. David A. Tyckoson maintains that librarians must first be accountable to the patron and then, to other librarians, administrators, and the profession as a whole (Tychoson 1992,151 55). Ethical guidelines obviously need to be established and monitored, and in particular, Canadian libraries should seriously investigate proposing a framework that somehow mirrors what has been put forth by Johan Bekker and Lee Finks. The code developed in 1975 seems vague and lacking in conviction. Libraries have seen many changes in the last twenty years, and that should be enough to propel the Canadian Library Association (CLA) to adopt a new code of ethics.
Questions of sanctions have been raised and the argument made that they must go hand in hand with codes of ethics, if ethical behaviour is to be adhered to by librarians (Rathbun 1993,11). Gene D. Lanier speculates on how a code can be enforced when ethics are usually very subjective (Lanier 1993,9). He advocates that codes incorporate a series of rules for librarians to follow in the face of "moral questions raised by the diverse applications and growing technological sophistication of computers" (Lanier 1993,10). In addition, Lanier envisions libraries of higher standards, if the administrators exercise and expect exemplary behaviour from all staff (Lanier 1993,10). In light of all discussed, the ethical codes in use are obviously inadequate when one considers the impact of modern technology on libraries and their staff, and as a result, how unpredictable the future is. A more frequent review of these codes is in order to compensate, and the development of swifter adoption procedures. Why is all this so important?
Because librarians possess valuable knowledge, skills, and experiences badly needed in a world of people who must come to terms with the power of information in their lives . . . We know that free access to information preserves democratic ideas, that information resources must be managed with care, and that the human spirit depends upon remembering the past, sharing the present in community, and dreaming about the future (Smith 1993,4).
Related Papers
Libraries are Centers of Social Consciousness and Community Involvement