The Privacy Trade-Off

The previous reading Cyber Crime 2.0 versus the Twittering classes (James, 2010) outlined the threats to online security and described the effort the Australian government is undertaking to prevent risks.  This report painted a somewhat alarming picture of Web 2.0.  It was therefore surprising to compare this with the Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) report, Sharing privacy and trust in our networked world: A report to the OCLC membership (2007) which documents a relatively low personal experience of privacy breaches (11%) (p. 6), suggesting that most participants experience a safe online involvement.  These figures are mirrored in how safe users felt online with over 50% feeling that their information was more secure than previously(pp 2-5).  These findings are perhaps an indication of organisations responding to concerns by including privacy policies on their websites.


Whilst the desire to maintain control over personal information is high, this is not reflected in how people use social networking privacy controls (OCLC, 2007, p.20).  This indicates a possible complacency or ignorance, or perhaps the fact that trust grows with continued use (OCLC, 2007, P.29). Users are also are comfortable trading their privacy for a perceived benefit (goods, services or a connection to others) (Raynes-Goldie, 2010, para. 19, OCLC, 2007, p. 38).   Not surprisingly, youth are less concerned and more apt to trade privacy for benefit, although an interesting spike in the statistics is noted with the 50yrs+ group willing to trade privacy for connecting with others with a similar interest (OCLC, 2007, p. 39).  Another curious insight is the fact that retail websites rate highly in the trust stakes (OCLC, 2007, p.29) perhaps this is because of the exchange of money for goods: the reliability is easier to measure than for social networking websites.


How do we determine what we share, how we manage our online identities?


As Individuals
If librarians are to engage with social networking sites professionally, the issue of being honest about who they are and who they represent is crucial.  It is entirely up to the individual to determine exactly how much of your persona you share with clients, after all, your engagement online is not unlike an exchange at the circulation counter. 


Librarians who maintain personal accounts must be mindful of who could be monitoring their page.  It is imperative to take into account the fact that a client could see your comments, or perhaps more worryingly, your friends' comments, which of course you have little control over.  The best way to handle your accounts is to be continually aware of privacy settings (sometimes an onerous task with the many changes), and to also monitor your online presence using a tool such as Pipl http://www.pipl.com/ or Google Alerts http://www.google.com/alerts (Davis, 2009).


As an Organisation
Even though library activity did not rate as a particularly private activity, libraries still enjoy a high level of trust at 60% (OCLC, 2007, p. 22).  It is vital that the library maintains this trust, and this can be achieved by:

• Maintaining the traditional library culture of protecting our clients' details
• Developing policy regarding client information on social networking sites
• Making such policy visible
• Keep well-informed on privacy setting issues on social networking sites so that we can advise our clients 
• Maintain an engaging but respectful online presence
• Monitoring the library social networking accounts for any untoward activity - either by clients or by outsiders

Using Social Networking sites is a balancing act - balance between sharing too little and sharing too much; balance between allowing enough engagement and collaboration and allowing too much, thus creating chaos.  

The key for an individual is to have a clear vision of who you are, and what you want the world to see.  The key for an organisation is, well, about the same.

Davis, L. (2009). 8 tools to track your footprints on the Web, February 1. Retrieved September 25, 2011 from Charles Sturt University website http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/8_tools_to_track_your_footprin.php

De Rosa, C., Cantrell, J., Havens, A., Hawk, J. & Jenkins, L. (2007). Section 3: Privacy, Security and Trust. In Sharing privacy and trust in our networked world: A report to the OCLC membership. Dublin, Ohio: OCLC. [ebook] Retrieved September 25, 2011 from Charles Sturt University website http://www.oclc.org/reports/pdfs/sharing_part3.pdf

James, M. L. Cyber crime 2.0 versus the Twittering classes. Parliament of Australia, Department of Parliamentary Services, Parliamentary Library Information, analysis and advice for the Parliament. Science, Technology, Environment and Resources Section, 24 February 2010 (2009-10). Retrieved September 23, 2011 from http://www.aph.gov.au/Library/pubs/bn/sci/Cybercrime.pdf