When I chose this topic, it was because this is one near and dear to me. Patron privacy and confidentiality are so important to librarianship that it is specifically mentioned in the ALA’s Code of Ethics:

3. We protect each library user’s right to privacy and confidentiality with respect to information sought or received and resources consulted, borrowed, acquired or transmitted.

I have dedicated a large section of this project to issues of mass surveillance in libraries. Privacy rights and confidentiality are under threat when mass surveillance is conducted, whether from government or private industry. Libraries are supposed to be a haven for the principle of intellectual freedom, as described in the Library Bill of Rights, and mass surveillance–especially when conducted in secret–threatens this very important principle. Like many people in the US, I was unaware of the issues of mass surveillance until the US PATRIOT Act. With the subsequent leaks of information on NSA surveillance on citizens, increasing data breaches, and the rise of the big data industry, mass surveillance in the library is something everyone should be informed about.

I think one of the most frustrating aspects of this topic was the surprising lack of information on surveillance in libraries. Most resources on mass surveillance were either in general or in specific non-library industries. The information that pertained to libraries specifically were mostly about privacy rights overall. Obviously, that indicates there is much more research to be done in this area, along with increasing public awareness of these issues. The issue of confidentiality, especially of patron records, is well-documented, going back to at least the 1970s.

Overall, the majority of information focused on public libraries, with academic libraries less represented. Academic libraries were more often included with libraries in general. What I learned from my interview with an academic librarian, along with some other information sources, is that academic libraries are actually lagging behind public libraries in implementing and practicing policies that protect the rights of the students and other patrons.

As I was searching the library databases, I couldn’t help but notice the option to sign into an account for some platforms, like EBSCOhost and ProQuest. Though I accessed these databases through my student account at the campus library, I could elect to create a separate account with each platform. The benefits, as touted by those platforms, were

Save preferences
Organize your research with folders
Share your folders with others
View others’ folders
Save and retrieve your search history
Create email alerts and/or RSS feeds
Gain access to your saved research remotely
—EBSCOhost’s My EBSCOhost account

Save and organize documents and other items.
Save, re-run and modify your searches.
View and manage your search alerts and RSS feeds.
Customize your interface and search settings.
Connect My Research to your RefWorks account and add items with a single click.
—ProQuest’s MyResearch account

While I’m sure EBSCOhost, ProQuest, and other platforms have privacy policies that say they protect users, those benefits to having an account with them creates another vulnerability in a user’s data, especially as these accounts are linked to personal information. ProQuest allows users to delete their account at any time, but will keep records up to three years after the account is closed. Though the temptation to be able t0 save my searches and search history is a strong one, it does bring up some interesting concerns about how far the confidentiality of library patron records extend and where the blind spots, gaps, and leaks may be.

This project was one of my top two favorite projects in the MLIS program as far as I have currently progressed. The nature of the blog format, along with individual smaller assignments within it over one big final paper, was a more organic research experience. The time and work that usually goes into details like conformity of formatting, tight organization, and strict focus on one specific subject (that are, in my opinion, the bane of research papers) was instead spent on research and discovery.