Welcome to Group 1 Blog: National Information Policy

In order to ensure a proper democracy, void of restraint to all information that is relevant to public knowledge, understanding and learning, National Information Policy is a vital component of the institution of libraries and the profession of librarians. The access to information remains one of the cornerstones of any democratic society. The choice of the powers that be to ensure the transfer of knowledge to citizens is the mainstay of progression and ultimately freedom.  This is where the importance of information policy lies: Not what information is allowed access but the fact that access is allowed to those who wish to utilize it.

To define exactly what National information policy is, Donald M. Lamberton said, “National information policy can be viewed as embracing efforts to put into practice the basic notion that the social and economic system will function more efficiently if improved information-flows to the decision making centers can be ensured” (Lumberton, 1974).

Agencies such as the National Commission of Libraries and Information Sciences help to maintain, shape and protect our national information policy. In 2008, the agency reported on how information has grown and evolved since the commission’s inception in 1970. The commission reported:

“During the ensuing 38 years that NCLIS has been advising the Congress and the President on policy issues, the world of information has been transformed from one where information is fixed in a particular geographic location (a physical library) to one that is global and known as the world wide web; from one that was paper-based to digital-based information and research accessible via a variety of electronic devices; from one that relied upon the collections of a particular institution to one where libraries throw open their collections on the Internet; from one that ‘relied’ on unreliable room-size computers, to one where multiple books are carried on a flash drive the size of a child’s finger.”   

The importance and relevance of national information policy to librarians is obvious. Librarians act as the gatekeepers to knowledge and information.  Our group has chosen key points to share, expand, and facilitate discussion in several areas pertaining to National Information Policy.  Please post, reply, and add to areas that spark your interest. 


Charles Webb and Group 1

References:

Lamberton, D.  (1974). National Information Policy.  Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 412, 145-151.

U.S. National Commission on Libraries and Information Science. (2008). Meeting the information needs of the American people: past actions and future initiatives; a report based on research sponsored by the U.S. National Commission on Libraries and Information Science and conducted by Nancy Davenport and Judith Russell on behalf of Information International Associates, Inc. 

http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED500878.pdf

Free Speech and National Information Policy: Champions of the First Amendment

Freedom is not some arbitrary right that is bestowed upon us because of the virtuous nature of our national character. It is a right we must protect and defend in both times of promise and peril if we are to remain in the future what we are in the present – a free and honorable people. – Abraham Lincoln
Everyone has a stake in National Information Policy. There is a tug and pull between those who want to restrict and those who want an unrestricted flow of information. Overtime policies can change in favor of one group or another. For example, the USA Patriot Act was put into effect on October 6, 2001 shortly after 9/11. It increased the abilities of law enforcement to perform various surveillance and investigative measures. Some states strengthened their privacy laws in reaction to the Patriot Act to protect their citizen’s privacy. The ALA continues to take a strong stance to protect patron privacy. This is an example of balancing an individual’s need for safety with their need for reliable and accurate information.
Library and Information Science professionals are champions of the First Amendment. Per Cornell University Law School Legal Information Institute:
“The First Amendment of the United States Constitution protects the right to freedom of religion and freedom of expression from government interference. See U.S. Const. amend. I. Freedom of expression consists of the rights to freedom of speech, press, assembly and to petition the government for a redress of grievances, and the implied rights of association and belief. The Supreme Court interprets the extent of the protection afforded to these rights. The First Amendment has been interpreted by the Court as applying to the entire federal government even though it is only expressly applicable to Congress. Furthermore, the Court has interpreted, the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as protecting the rights in the First Amendment from interference by state governments. See U.S. Const. amend. XIV.”
The Supreme Court hears cases pertaining to the First Amendment. These comments were given in cases regarding obscene material, but are still relevant to National Information Policy. Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote, “If the First Amendment means anything, it means that a State has no business telling a man, sitting in his own house, what books he may read or what films he may watch.” (Stanley v. Georgia, 394 U.S. 557 (1969)) Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote: “First Amendment freedoms are most in danger when the government seeks to control thought or to justify its laws for that impermissible end. The right to think is the beginning of freedom, and speech must be protected from the government because speech is the beginning of thought.” (Wikipedia)
However, it is not always easy or simple to be a champion of the First Amendment. In 1977, the ALA commissioned the creation of a film entitled “The Seeker” in conjunction with their theme of National Information Policy. The premise of the film was that a school group invited a “white supremacist” to come and conduct a discussion for their class. The repercussions of that invitation at the school and within the community are portrayed in the film. The film itself challenged the ALA’s own abilities to have open discussion about controversial topics. It generated feelings of betrayal, suspicions of racism, and conflict between its members. (Wedgeworth)
National Information Policy requires us to be advocates for our communities. Our role is to aid our communities in acquiring access to the information resources and formats that they need and want. (Allen) Sometimes this will require us to say that a certain book should be available or that it is wrong to place restrictions on certain topics or that such and such a database should be made available for use by patrons. Then we must continue to stand by our decisions. The free flow of and access to information is vital to the democratic process.
Things to Think About:

• How can we as LIS professionals champion the First Amendment today?
• What are ways we can be advocates for our communities?

References:
Allen, Kenneth B. “The information society: will the right to know become the need to know?..” CD-ROM Professional. 3.n3 (May 1990): 6(2). Academic OneFile. Gale. Librareo. 14 Oct 2011
Case, Donald O. “A framework for the information policies with examples from the United States.” Library Philosophy and Practice. (Sept 2010): NA. Academic OneFile. Gale. Librareo. 14 Oct 2011
“First Amendment” (Cornell University’s Legal Information Institute). 19 Aug 2010, 5:27 PM. www.law.cornell.edu. Viewed 7 Nov 2011. http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/First_amendment
“First Amendment.” Last modified 4 November 2011, 2:19. Viewed 7 Nov 2011. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_amendment
“Library Community Statement on Freedom of Speech and Access to Information.” 20 Sept 2001. www.ala.org. Viewed 9 Nov 2011. http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/advleg/federallegislation/theusapatriotact/FreedomofSpeech9.pdf
Wedgeworth, Robert. “The seeds of prosperity: ALA in the 1970s: a former executive director tells the story of Huron Plaza construction and the dawn of high finance for the Association. (ALA History).” American Libraries. 34.2 (Feb 2003): 47(5). Academic OneFile. Gale. Librareo. 14 Oct. 2011

Aubrey Maynard

Copyright

One of the main components of our National Information Policy is copyright and intellectual property. The United States decided early on that this was an issue that they needed to address. Therefore, in 1787 it was written in Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the Constitution that, “Congress shall have power…To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries” (Cornell University Law School, 2011).
The founding fathers thought that it was important that the time of the copyright be limited and the emphasis was on “promoting progress.” The Copyright Act of 1790 allowed for 14 years of copyright, with one renewal of an additional 14 years. Today, it is the life of the author plus 70 years. (Association of Research Libraries [ARL], 2011)

Where do librarians fit into this? Should we be defending the authors and publishers whose works we make available or should we side with the patrons who need to be able to work with the materials? The ALA states that “libraries are leaders in trying to maintain a balance of power between copyright holders and users, in keeping with the fundamental principles outlined in the Constitution and carefully crafted over the past 200 years.” (American Library Association [ALA], 2011)

Many libraries rely on Fair Use. Fair Use states that, with limits, you can make copies for “criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research” and not for profit, it is allowed. (Copyright Law of the US Government, 2011) It can be difficult to understand what falls under Fair Use. The tools listed under the resources section of this blog might be of use.

Section 108 is the section of Copyright Law that applies directly to libraries. It allows for copying of a section of a book or work or even the entire work under specific circumstances. (Copyright Law of the US Government, 2011) Here is a handy tool to help you understand when it is allowed to make copies:
http://librarycopyright.net/108spinner/

Questions and Examples:
Do you feel that copyright should skew in favor of creators or consumers? Do you think it is skewed now?
Should the offspring of creators continue to receive benefits?
Should a genealogist be allowed to reprint a 30 year old newspaper obituary about an ancestor?
Should someone be allowed to make a recorded copy of an item for a blind person?
Should a folk song be allowed to be sung by a group meeting in private?
Should artists be able to sing a cover of their favorite song in concert?

Obviously, I am not a lawyer or an expert on copyright law, so please do not take this blog as legal advice.

Additional Resources:
This is ALA’s page of links for copyright information.
http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/copyright/generalcopyright/index.cfm
This is ALA’s page entitled “Copyright 101 Educational Tools.” Included is information about Fair Use, Interlibrary Loan, international copyright and more.
http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/copyright/copyright101.cfm
Copyright Advisory Network, which is a blog sponsored by ALA, has up to date information on the state of Copyright.
http://librarycopyright.net/wordpress/

References:
American Library Association. (2011). Copyright. Retrieved November 9, 2011, from http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/copyright/index.cfm
Association of Research Libraries. (2011). Copyright Timeline: A History of Copyright in the United States. Retrieved November 9, 2011, from http://www.arl.org/pp/ppcopyright/copyresources/copytimeline.shtml
Copyright Law of the US Government. (2011). Limitations on Exclusive Rights: Fair Use. Retrieved November 9, 2011, from http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107
Cornell University Law School. (2011). US Constitution. Retrieved November 9, 2011, from http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlei#section8

By Ardith Ohka

The Nation's Libraries & Information Policy

Information policy dictates the rights and responsibilities pertaining to the acquisition, usage, keeping and distribution of information. Libraries in the United States have long been the leader in providing information to the public. A nationwide network of libraries has evolved over the past century that enables people to gain access to knowledge. This system of public, academic, virtual and school libraries was not developed or implemented by any national governing body.  The main goal of this national network of libraries is to provide unrestricted access to information thus ensuring a better-informed public. This is imperative to the preservation of the democracy.  Libraries must continue to develop and uphold policies that support their goals and mission.  

The following are a few key issues must be considered and safeguarded with the creation and application of information policies:

Intellectual Freedom: "Intellectual freedom can exist only where two essential conditions are met: first, that all individuals have the right to hold any belief on any subject and to convey their ideas in any form they deem appropriate, and second, that society makes an equal commitment to the right of unrestricted access to information and ideas regardless of the communication medium used, the content of work, and the viewpoints of both the author and the receiver of information. "Intellectual Freedom Manual, 7th edition

ALA actively advocates in defense of the rights of library users to read, seek information, and speak freely as guaranteed by the First Amendment.  A publicly supported library provides free and equal access to information for all people of that community.  We enjoy this basic right in our democratic society.  It is a core value of the library profession (Intellectual Freedom, 2011).

Equity of Access: The ALA states “Equity of access means that all people have the information they need-regardless of age, education, ethnicity, language, income, physical limitations or geographic barriers. It means they are able to obtain information in a variety of formats-electronic, as well as print. It also means they are free to exercise their right to know without fear of censorship or reprisal” (Equity of Access, 2011).

Access to Information: The ALA states “Libraries are major sources of information for society and they serve as guardians of the public’s access to information more generally. The advent of the digital world has revolutionized how the public obtains its information and how libraries provide it. Libraries help ensure that Americans can access the information they need – regardless of age, education, ethnicity, language, income, physical limitations or geographic barriers – as the digital world continues to evolve. Core values of the library community such as equal access to information, intellectual freedom, and the objective stewardship and provision of information must be preserved and strengthened in the evolving digital world” (Access to Information , 2011).

Libraries must present strong missions that are backed up with written policies and justly enforced.   Libraries must safeguard the previously stated key issues to do their part in ensuring an informed public and thusly persevering democracy. 

Works Cited

Access to Information . (2011). Retrieved November 13, 2011, from American Library Association : http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/access/accesstoinformation/index.cfm

Equity of Access. (2011). Retrieved November 13, 2011, from American Library Association : http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/access/equityofaccess/index.cfm

Intellectual Freedom. (2011). Retrieved November 13, 2011, from American Library Association: http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/intfreedom/index.cfm

By Annee Imle

NIP in the United States Compared to NIP in China

When looking at national information policy in the United States, one might wonder how other countries look at information, particularly the freedom of information. Often, the United States likes to place emphasis on countries that are considered to be more controlling with information, both throughout the government and the general public. One of these countries is the People’s Republic of China.

The People’s Republic of China often appears in the news in the US. Many of these articles and news reports have to do with China’s views on information, with an emphasis on how controlling the government is with information. Just today (November 11), The Washington Post published an article with a title beginning “China Issues Threat Filled Rules to News Media” (2011). But is the Chinese government really as harsh as it is made out to be?
The first known information policy in China was issued in 1958 (Liu 1996). However, it was not until the 1980’s that any noticeable work with the subject was done. Following a long and tumultuous period of governmental, societal, and economic changes, China began to develop a “National Information Infrastructure” under the leadership of Deng Xiaoping in 1984 (Liu 1996).

This brings us to one of the first differences in information policy between the United States and China. In the United States, information policy began as soon as the country was created. The first amendment was adopted in 1791, meaning information policy is over two hundred years old in the United States. With China’s many governmental changes, it was impossible for the country to keep a steady viewpoint on any information policy. Therefore, their policies are much younger, only about thirty years old.

During the 1990’s China seemed to be going backwards with the idea of freedom of information; in 1996 China created regulations on internet access, which forced all internet users to register with the government and allowed the government to monitor all internet activities (Tan, Mueller and Foster 1997). Some of these regulations are still in place today and are often the subject of critique by Americans.

This brings us to another difference in information policy in the United States and China. Unlike the United States, China is not democratic. They are a communist country. The constitution in China does not grant Chinese citizens the right to information and existing legislation (Horsley 2007). It does allow citizens freedom of speech and press, but there are also laws that control what media can be allowed. Anything deemed too controversial or possible of “endangering the state” are not allowed (Bennet 2011).

However, in 2007 China passed a piece of legislation which makes an effort to share information with the Chinese people. The Nationwide Open Government Information Regulations ensures access to government information in order to create more governmental transparency for its citizens (Horsley 2007). The passing of this legislation is historic for China. It shows that the government understands the need for information sharing.

When looking at Chinese national information policy, one must remember several things. China is not democratic. Their citizens have different rights than those of the United States. Also, in being communist, China is ruled by one party. It makes sense that in order for one party to remain in control, information must also be controlled. And yet, China has made a great deal of progress in the last thirty years as far as becoming more open with information. One must also remember that information policy is much newer in China, so they may be facing dilemmas that the United States overcame many years ago.

In conclusion, is it right to try and compare such different countries when it comes to information policies? Especially when they have two opposite forms of government? And when one has been dealing with information policy for such a longer time than the other? And just because another country has different ideas about information sharing than the United States, does this mean they are wrong?



References

China issues threat-filled rules to news media to try to rein in a critical internet. (2011, Novermber 11). The Associated Press. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia-pacific/china-issues-threat-filled-rules-to-news-media-to-try-to-rein-in-a-critical-internet/2011/11/11/gIQAhtNUBN_story.html

Bennett, I. (2011, March 7). Media censorship in china media censorship in china. Retrieved from http://www.cfr.org/china/media-censorship-china/p11515

Horsley, J. P. (2007). China adopts first nationwide open government information regulations. Retrieved from http://www.law.yale.edu/documents/pdf/Intellectual_Life/Ch_China_Adopts_1st_OGI_Regulations.pdf

Liu, Y. Q. (1996, August 25). The impact of national policy on developing information infrastructure nationwide issues in p.r. china and the u.s. . Retrieved from http://archive.ifla.org/IV/ifla62/62-liuy3.htm

Tan, T. A., Mueller, M., & Foster, W. (1997). China's new internet regulations: Two steps forward, one step back. Communications of the ACM, 40(12), 11-16. Retrieved from http://som.csudh.edu/fac/lpress/devnat/nations/china/chinah.html

-Megan Parish

The Freedom of Information Act

In 1863, during the Gettysburg Address, Abraham Lincoln described our government as one of, by and for the people. Even earlier, during the birth of our nation, Thomas Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence that the people of the United States were taking, and keeping, the right to overthrow the government when necessary. Despite these very high claims, there was, during the bulk of our history, a right we were lacking which made both of those statements a little difficult to have confidence in: the right to know what our “government of the people” was doing.

Until 1967, during the presidency of Lyndon Johnson, it was up to the general public to prove they had a right to gain access to a particular document of the executive branch. After the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) went into effect it became the responsibility of the government to provide information when it was requested unless there was good cause to withhold that information (The National Security Archive).

After the Watergate scandal there was a stronger desire from the public to gain access to information. Congress responded by voting in a bill that would significantly increase the power of FOIA, and despite the fact that it was vetoed by President Ford, the veto was overruled and in 1974 agencies' decisions on information dissemination became subject to judicial review, fee limitations went into effect, and agencies were required to respond to requests within ten days (The National Security Archive).

In the past three decades the FOIA has gone through several changes with each new administration. Under Reagan and Bush, Jr. the intelligence agencies were able to close access to many of their records. Under Clinton all offices were required to become more open, and the EFOIA Act, which requires executive branch offices to post electronic documents in online reading rooms, was enacted (The National Security Archive). Sometimes alterations were made through official legislation, and some narrowing and broadening came naturally with the moods and policies of the presidency of the time.

The current administration’s policy is, at least on paper, one of openness. President Obama states in his FOIA memo that, “accountability through transparency, is the most prominent expression of a profound national commitment to ensuring an open Government,” and, “In the face of doubt, openness prevails. It is implied throughout the memo that if an agency doesn’t know if something should be released or not, it should (Obama). In reality it seems that our executive branch has been just as noncompliant in its releases as the previous administration:

“One of the exemptions allowed to deny Freedom of Information requests has been used by the Obama administration 70,779 times in its first year; the same exemption was used 47,395 times in Bush's final budget year.” (Malcom, 2010)

Apparently after these and other figures came into light a second memo was released to the executive branch offices instructing them again to have a policy of transparency, but only time will tell.

Listed below are the current exemptions to FOIA that agencies can use to withhold information:

Exemption 1 – Protects information that is properly classified in the interest of national security pursuant to Executive Order 12958.
Exemption 2 – Protects records related solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of an agency.
Exemption 3 – Protects information exempted from release by statute.
Exemption 4 – Protects trade secrets and commercial or financial information which could harm the competitive posture or business interests of a company.
Exemption 5 – Protects the integrity of the deliberative or policy-making processes within the agency by exempting from mandatory disclosure opinion, conclusions, and recommendations included within inter-agency or intra-agency memoranda or letters.
Exemption 6 – Protects information that would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy of the individuals involved.
Exemption 7 – Protects records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes the release of which could reasonably be expected:

• a. 7(A) – to interfere with enforcement proceedings.
• b. 7(B) – would deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication.
• c. 7(C) – to constitute an unwarranted invasion of the personal privacy of a third party/parties (in some instances by revealing an investigative interest in them).
• d. 7(D) – to disclose the identity/identities of confidential sources.
• e. 7(E) – would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions.
• f. 7(F) –to endanger the life or physical safety of an individual.

Exemption 8 – Protects information that is contained in or related to examination, operating, or condition reports prepared by, on behalf of, or for the use of an agency responsible for the regulation or supervision of financial institutions.
Exemption 9 – Protects geological and geophysical information and data, including maps, concerning wells. (FOIA Exemptions, 2011)

Do these exemptions all seem legitimate?
Are there any that you think should be added or removed?
How do you feel about our current ability to gain access to government documentation?

Works Cited

FOIA Exemptions. (2011, March 24). Retrieved November 2011, from Department of Homeland Security: http://www.dhs.gov/xfoia/gc_1208265747435.shtm

FOIA. (n.d.). Retrieved November 2011, from Federal Communication Commission: http://www.fcc.gov/foia

Lincoln, A. (n.d.). Retrieved November 2011, from Our Documents: http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?doc=36&page=transcript

Malcom, A. (2010, March 21). A little secret about Obama's transparency. L.A. Times.

Obama, B. (n.d.). Freedom of Information Act. Retrieved November 2011, from The White House: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/FreedomofInformationAct/

The National Security Archive. (n.d.). Retrieved November 2011, from http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/foia/special.html

by Erin Yancey