After much anticipation the IWB conference is almost here! The IWB committee has been working hard to make this year’s conference the best ever. Below is an abbreviated schedule; please refer to www.iwbconference.ca for more details.
Keynote Address: 21st Century Challenges for Memory Institutions
Dr. Daniel J. Caron, Librarian and Archivist of Canada
Panel Discussion: Privacy in the Digital Age
Student Poster Session
Parallel Session 1: Design Challenges For A New Halifax Central Library
Judith Hare, CEO, Halifax Public Library
Parallel Session 2: Reinventing the Research Library: Reorganizing for Cultural Change, Community Need, and Institutional Impact
Mike Ridley, CIO & University Librarian, University of Guelph
Keynote Address: Webs, Meshes, Forests and Trees: Toward A New Ecology Of Information
Nora Young, host of CBC Radio’s Spark
Student Name : Owen Hewitt
IWB Session : Keynote Address
Speaker : Daniel Caron
Topic : Memory Institutions
A quick summary, how it relates to information policy and then my thoughts.
Summary: Daniel Caron’s remarks on the role of memory institutions focused on their importance to literacy (whether social, cultural, historical, local, national, etc.) and democracy. He stressed three functions they have, being acquisition, preservation and providing access. One of the threads he developed along this line was the nature of migration, not only of people, but also of information. With so much transfer of people and stories, the question becomes, as Mr. Caron put it, how do we tell those stories, to ourselves and others?
His answer to this question was anchored in the physical presence of memory institutions and their collection of documents in order to create identity as well as shared understanding between identities which lead to national unity and provide the basis for democracy. After all, memory institutions, as a part of society, seek to centralize power in its documents, where information is segregated for its value and used to provide services to the civil population.
However he followed up to this statement by citing the trend towards more de-centralized, adaptive and malleable forms of memory. Web 2.0, cloud computing, the integration of peripherals and applications leads us to another interesting query Mr.Caron made: Who should be in charge of making decisions and articulating the rights of individuals in the developing information society? When we answer these questions, we are also attempting to answer whether or not we can forge a continuing democracy.
It may be several years before we fully understand the impact of technology, especially in what Mr Caron classified as a ‘culture of immediacy’ in the information environment. As these new tools are developed, we influence how it evolves by our reaction (even if we have very little understanding), creating new interpretations and viewpoints. Furthermore, depending on where you live, you will see and use these technologies differently, necessitating a thoughtful investigation of how memory institutions exist and serve across the world.
Mr. Caron tied these ideas back to his first statements on the functions of memory institutions. While Access and Preservation may have changed due to new technology, they are nothing without a balanced and adaptive acquisitions policy that is appropriate to the time it exists in. He was especially emphatic on this point when he spoke about how the decentralized nature of information creation and information services has taken on as the ‘non-professional’ information managers and creators, that more and more people are becoming, may not have a solid idea of what is truly important in crafting a collective memory. All in all, it was a very impressive keynote address.
Relevance to Information Policy: In INFO 6610 [Information Policy], the following definition was offered for Information Policy during class discussion:
“Information policy is a framework where an organization determines what information it collects or creates, how they organize it for internal and external use and who can access it. Information policy is often created to fit with established practices and can either change or remain unchanged in response to the environment or practices which concern it.”
Now recall Mr. Caron’s statement on the importance of memory institutions to the debate on who gets to make decisions regarding the rights of users of information and also how they must change in regards to the increasing decentralization of information creation and management. From this, I would posit that public servants should always seek to understand and track the public perception and expectations of memory institutions and the narratives they offer.
As our societies change, values and priorities change as well, however the continuity that is offered by memory institutions allow us to understand the growth and development of our information policies. It is no surprise that often the first thing an oppressive force (whether foreign or domestic) does is to co-opt or destroy the symbols, documents and institutions that define a free and democratic society.
Thus, memory institutions are an integral retrospective of information policy through the changing (or durable) role they play for the citizens they serve.
My thoughts: During his address, Mr. Caron made a remark about ‘post-humanism’ referring directly to the integration of information technology into clothing, and perhaps maybe later, into the human.
Now, let’s avoid the kneejerk reaction of conceptualizing some kind of dystopian nightmare or cyberpunk fantasy from that phrase, I believe the point remains that whatever kind of ‘augmentation’ occurs in a post-human society, whether be mechanical, pharmaceutical, nano-technological or merely conceptual (such as the global citizen or the one person media empire), the post-human society won’t be that much different from a human one.
What intrigued me when I asked him about what he would want to teach the members of a post-human society where everyone contributes. His answer was: knowing what to throw away. Tying back to a phrase he used, ‘the culture of immediacy’, I’d also like to speak about its sibling ‘the culture of entitlement’. We’ve all heard about how unrealistic expectations are affecting our society, the desire for celebrity or to be seen as special even when there is no specific quality to warrant this.
Naturally in such a society, people will think that plenty of the banal information they produce will have meaning and should be contributed. I think examples of what could be the standard in a post-human society include twitter and facebook updates.
However, collective memory is not utterly dependant on one individual. After all, Trudeau wouldn’t be as memorable as he was without Stanfield. A painful (perhaps necessarily so) realization of the relative insignificance of specific contributions towards a collective memory may be what ushers in the ‘post-human’ society, leading to a healthier and more constructive use of integrated technologies as well as healthier and more satisfied individuals who are able to draw strength, guidance and meaning from collective memory without agonizing and expecting to become part of it.
Student Name : Barbara Hill-Taylor
IWB Session : IWB Conference
Speakers : Dr Daniel Caron, Carla Heggie, Mike Ridley, Nora Young
Topic : Meaning from Data
At the end of IWB, I was left wondering whether a common thread could be drawn from the multiple perspectives presented by the speakers. Also, I was still reflecting on the comments by Frank Work, Alberta Privacy Commissioner, as posted by David Canton on the Slaw blog (http://www.slaw.ca/2010/01/20/musings-of-frank-work-alberta-privacy-commissioner/). Work states that “We are awash in data that we can’t seem to turn into anything useful.” Further, he notes that he “sees a trend for organizations to collect huge amounts of data, and try to turn it into intelligence later”.
During the question period following Dr. Daniel Caron’s presentation on memory institutions, a student asked for a `take away’ message. His reply surprised me, although I am not an archivist and others in the room have thought much more about this topic; Dr Caron said that we needed to not be “afraid to let information go”. Choices need to be made, he stated, we are no longer able to keep everything. His point was that if we attempt to preserve all data, we will become overwhelmed, and therefore, unable to make meaning from the vast quantities of data we store.
Mr. Michael Ridley, CIO and University Librarian, presented the process and results of an innovative re-structuring of the University of Guelph’s Research Library. Moving beyond traditional roles, the library now foregrounds information translation or knowledge creation. I like to think of this as moving the focus from “data” to “meaning”. Although still evolving, I think what Guelph is moving towards is what both Work and Caron were concerned about.
Finally, CBC radio host Nora Young (http://www.cbc.ca/spark/) presented a scattering of information bytes, anecdotes, and concepts in “Webs, Meshes, Forests and Trees: Toward a New Ecology of Information”. She reiterated the concept of `media as a tool’ (both Carla Heggie in her presentation on privacy and Ridley discussed this idea, interestingly both by referencing Marshall McLuhan), and spoke of our societies’ evolution in understanding the parameters of using new media. She spoke of the tussle of shaping ethics, of drowning in data, and again, of making meaning from all the data and information that we are swimming in.
McLuhan states that “The message of any medium or technology is the change of scale or pace or pattern that it introduces into human affairs.” (Understanding Media, N. Y., 1964, p. 8 from http://www.marshallmcluhan.com/faqs.html). It is this change in scale AND pace AND pattern that we as information managers will be dealing with. I believe that was the common thread in the IWB presentations. It seems that no matter which sector we choose, it will be the changes in the flow of data, and more importantly, the attempts and ability to transform this into knowledge or intelligence that will inform our careers. The need to treat this conversion with thoughtfulness and care is the stuff of information policy. Carla Heggie stressed the importance of “proactive ethical” considerations and accountability. It will only be through informed, ethical and timely information policy that we will adapt to the new pathways of our profession.
Student Name: Kelly Smith
IWB Session: Panel Discussion
Speakers: Sandy Hounsell, Dwight Fischer, Carla Heggie
Topic: Privacy in the Digital Age
Privacy in the Digital Age: Issues, Challenges, Rights, and Future Plans
I recently attended an insightful and significant panel discussion at the Information Without Borders Conference. The issues, challenges, individual rights and future outlook of privacy in Nova Scotia as well as Canada, and Canada’s privacy position from a global perspective, were thoroughly discussed. The panel discussion titled Privacy in the Digital Age included the contributions of a moderator (Nat Smith, MLIS/MPA student, Dalhousie University), three professionals in the field (Carla Heggie, Information Access & Privacy Manager, NS Labour & Workforce Development; Sandy Hounsell, Senior Research and Outreach Advisor, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada; Dwight Fischer, Assistant VP – CIO, Dalhousie University) and some audience participation from both professionals and graduate students. Major themes emerged during the privacy panel discussion. Each panelist made some interesting points on the topic.
Carla Heggie argued that the largest issues pertaining to privacy include the misunderstanding, misrepresentation, and misinterpretation of privacy. Technology is a tool which we must learn to use properly, while keeping in mind that a balance must be held between privacy and access and that both can be achieved simultaneously. Heggie also shared her mantra that when it comes to privacy, we must be proactive, and do the right thing at the front end.
Dwight Fischer had similar ideas to Heggie. He argued that everyone is responsible for protecting their own personal information and privacy. The significance and increasing access and protecting privacy is at a high, particularly with the presence of cloud computing and information being held on servers not only outside of the province, but Canada. Fischer focused on the dangers of outsourcing email, with a focus on the Patriot Act and Gmail. In addition, Fischer supported data being centralized and the protection of core assets.
Sandy Hounsell raised concerns over social networking and cyber crime (particularly identity theft), as threats to personal information and privacy. He stated, like Heggie, that a proactive approach must be taken when it comes to personal privacy. Privacy settings must be built in and monitored upon the creation of electronic records. Interestingly, Hounsell questioned if technology was the solution for privacy issues in the digital age, and recommended looking at the human factor. This involves a focus on training, taking responsibility, good corporate and personal practice to address the issue.
The panel discussion’s critical thoughts and well articulated arguments allowed me to gain a deeper insight into privacy in the digital age. Many of us subscribe to various social networking systems and may not be doing everything possible in order to protect our privacy (e.g., Facebook). It is certainly alarming that it is impossible to erase the harm done from a privacy breach. Once the privacy is breached it can not be undone, only mitigation can be done. With that being said, I think that all three professional panelists made some excellent points regarding the necessity to maintain privacy in our increasingly technology-driven, networked world. In particular, I agree that we, as individuals, must take a proactive stance regarding privacy concerns and make sure your own information free from harm and kept private. Knowledge regarding the scope and meaning of privacy regulations is critical and goes hand in hand with the practice of responsible personal information management.
I strongly agree with all three panelists that it is our own responsibility to ensure that our privacy is kept. In addition, although the increasing use of social networking sites creates many privacy challenges, I think that if a person practices critical awareness and manage privacy settings as well as take the initiative not to share unnecessary personal information online, a balance can be found between the attraction of social networking and the privacy issues that result in using them.
What will the state of privacy be in the future and the digital age develops further? I think it is sound to argue that technologies will continue to grow, and that the manner in which humans use technology in our personal and professional lives will expand. As a result, privacy issues will remain and is it enormously important to promote education, training, and awareness of privacy to people. For example, public libraries could hold information sessions regarding the role of privacy and social networking sites.
From an international perspective, Canada protects its citizens relatively well with legislation such as the Privacy Act (1985), and is a leader in promoting personal privacy rights. It is important to move forward in ensuring that privacy remains as a fundamental right and secondly, to continue addressing the challenges arising in this digital age. The best way to do this will include a focus on humans rather than the technology itself, and taking precautions to avoid privacy breaches and the harm that follows.
Student Name : Lara Killian
IWB Session : First keynote speech
Speaker : Dr Daniel J Caron
Topic : 21st Century Challenges for Memory Institutions
For the opening keynote address of the 2010 IWB conference, Dr Caron gave an engaging talk about the role of libraries and other repositories in preserving documents that support cultural and societal memories. Early on, he remarked that though many aspects of the information landscape are constantly changing around us, the core business of these “memory institutions” remains the same. Information managers support larger efforts of literacy and democracy by preserving documents that define a society in terms of its history, science, and culture.
Dr Caron spoke about existing and emerging methods of transmitting information, pointing out that information must be accessible and sharable in order to have value. I was particularly taken with his point that not all documents have equal value, and decisions must be made about what to keep and what to discard. I appreciated Dr Caron’s assertion that the value of a record should be determined by its creator. He also commented that if the creator of a valueless document wishes to retain such a document, the creator should pay for the storage costs. Dr Caron’s remarks about the importance of making difficult decisions to discard information because it does not have value are highly relevant to anyone engaging with information policy.
I have worked in municipal offices where retention schedules may or may not exist to assist staff in being consistent about what is discarded and what needs to be kept for a specific amount of time. Different attitudes toward the value of information and the space, whether digital or physical, needed to maintain a collection, can affect retention policies. It can be difficult, in my experience, to stick to a retention schedule when it does exist, due to these differing attitudes. If no retention schedule exists, or the creator of the documents does not recognize that they have little or no value, it is even tougher to discard them.
On a personal level, it can be very hard to decide that a record really has no value, and that it should be discarded. It may be a duplicate (but I might need that receipt!) or a record that I don’t see a future use for (but I might need those class notes!) or a document that I didn’t create, that I can retrieve from a library (but I might need that copy of this article I downloaded!).
I have trouble identifying documents that define me as an individual, that will impact not only how I understand myself, but how others in the future might view me through the lens of my personal archive. Or perhaps it is not that this task of assigning value is difficult, but that I simply don’t have the time — or willpower — to deal with my own records efficiently. Perhaps I should develop a retention schedule for my own records.
Dr Caron pointed out that the decision of an information manager to keep something has an impact. From the information management theory I have studied, I have developed a personal ideal of the information manager as a thoughtful, well-informed, but non-discriminatory individual. Dr Caron’s remark that information professionals are not, in fact, neutral grabbed my attention. Librarians and archivists have a great deal of influence about what will be known about a society in the future. The documents that are kept are those that will define, for good or ill, the memory of a past society. They also shape the development of the current society.
Library and Archives Canada is currently reworking its framework for the preservation of Canada’s documentary heritage. According to the current schedule (found here [http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/modernization/012004-900-e.html]), a “Preservation Orientation Instrument” and a “Resource Discovery Orientation Instrument” are in development. Dr Caron mentioned that we can all watch for his “vision document” on the LAC website in the next few weeks. I’ll be on the look out for these documents.
Student Name : Jessica Babineau
IWB Session : Panel Discussion
Speaker : Carla Heggie, Sandy Hounsell, and Dwight Fischer
Topic : Privacy and the Digital Age
Password privacy, policy and education
?The panel discussion with Carla Heggie (Information Access & Privacy Manager, Nova Scotia Labour & Workforce Development), Sandy Hounsel (Senior Research and Outreach Advisor, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada) and Dwight Fischer (Assistant Vice President and CIO, Dalhousie University) on the topic of Privacy and Digital Age, brought awareness to listeners on the vulnerable positions we place ourselves (often through naivety and misunderstanding) when it comes to the internet and our personal information. With knowledge as power, the internet has become a source of great weight and of great risk. Members of the panel demonstrated that security measures on the internet are like locks on doors, they only keep out the honest.
Throughout the discussion, many different elements regarding privacy policies, safety procedures and dangers were brought to the table. One of the most striking mentions was the topic of the rise of cyber-crime, mentioned by Mr. Sandy Hounsel. According to Hounsel, over 10 million cases of cyber-crime taken place in the US and these crimes are on the rise.
When is the last time you filled out an online quiz about yourself and posted it to your Facebook page as a note?
Mother’s maiden name?
First pet’s name?
When is your birthday?
Prior to filling out this kind of of questionnaire, where was the last time you answered these questions? When creating a online banking account? an email account? Ebay? Kijiji? With the rise of social networking sites, an information gold-mine has been made available to cyber-thieves. When made aware of the dangers of answering these questions on a public medium, which seem so simple and innocent, one has to question why more people are not more cautious with the information they make available. Without thought of the retributions, user can be placed in risky positions.
The great question is now: how is this resolved? Mr. Hounsel, during the panel discussion, wonders whether more technology is the way to resolve the problems that are at hand regarding safety. He states that taking into account the human factor is a far more effective means of aiding towards the resolve of the problem of information safety on the Internet. This is an important concept: the idea of creating awareness, rather than resolving technology with technology, and developing strategies which lead humans to protect their information in a more effective way on the internet is essential to improve online safety and a decrease of identity theft.
The concept can be related to information policy in terms the importance for organizations to develop policies and standards that enable users, not only to play it safe, but to learn how to stay safe on the Internet by means of taking into account the human factor in their technologies.
There are innumerable safety risks on the Internet. One of these is passwords. Policies for password structures developed by online communities are an innovative way to proactively educate users in how to protect themselves in a way that is, in a sense, mandatory. I think that, in most instances, education on the Internet is a difficult process because users have no desire to actually read terms of privacy. If I suggest that you take a look at Microsoft’s page on creating strong passwords[http://www.microsoft.com/protect/fraud/passwords/create.aspx] before developing your new password, would you do it? Would you follow their suggestions? Probably not. But if policies suggest such requirements, we’re looking at a whole new development of privacy education (find an example of password policy by the SANS institute here [http://www.sans.org/security-resources/policies/Password_Policy.pdf] ).
I believe it is possible to also take policies one step further. This concept of education is one that is only beginning to roll. In light of Hounsels statement regarding the human factor, I see an effective means in this situation is to manipulate current technologies to ensure that individuals are protecting themselves in a more effective manner. According to a report recently released by Impervia [http://www.imperva.com/news/press/2010/01_21_Imperva_Releases_Detailed_Analysis_of_32_Million_Passwords.html], many Internet users have been sub-par in their password development skills. By not only developing password policies, but by creating systems that ensure that users develop more secure passwords – we are ensuring that they’re placing deadbolts on their doors rather than clicking the little lock on the screen door.
A great example is WordPress.com’s signup page – when typing in your password, not only are there suggestions (ex: use upper and lower case, numbers, symbols..) but when you are typing your password, a black bar tells you whether your password is good, great, bad, or too short. I dare you to type in “rockyou” or your mother’s maiden name. From an information policy perspective, it not only integral that password policy be in effect, but educating users in what should be a good password must be integrated into the process for effective safety.
Through the panel discussion, one charismatic speaker stated that policies are often developed with common sense in mind, but that many people do not use common sense when using the Internet. I believe that the future will hold more and more mandatory safety measures imposed on users as a means of educating them on common sense methods for Internet privacy/identity safety.
On top of ensuring that users have safer passwords, I think they will soon have to have certain security setting, more cryptic password retrieval safety measures and mandatory virus/spyware/malaware downloads prior to creating accounts with organizations. These may begin as policies, but by again taking the human factor into account, these elements will become more regulatory and interactive.
Jaime Griffis
IWB Conference: Keynote Address
Dr. Daniel Caron, Librarian and Archivist of Canada
“21st Century Challenges for Memory Institutions”
In order to address the issue of 21st century challenges for memory institutions, Dr. Daniel Caron was invited to speak at the 2010 IWB Conference for the keynote address. Introduced by Dr. Black as being “fearlessness in leadership”, Caron spoke about how knowledge and memory institutions needed to be adaptive in order to address the needs of information management in the present and future. Mr. Caron’s speech at the IWB conference is relevant to information policy in that the relatively new Librarian and Archivist of Canada is a professional individual who has no training in library and information studies/science or archives and he is responsible for making decisions and creating policy for the National Library and Archives Canada. His decisions have a huge impact on what is collected, preserved and destroyed. This particular session was important with reference to information policy in that Caron stated that policies needed to dictate “preservation at the point of creation”. He also went on to state that these preservation policies must also take into account how “value” should be assigned to a document at the creator level. If it is not valued, then it must be disposed of.
I both agree and disagree on certain points Dr. Caron presented in his keynote address. Firstly, Caron was on the right track in pointing out that knowledge and memory institutions have to adapt in the sense that they must move away from “stand alone institutions” to one of collaboration with communities and networks of institutions joined together. Along with this notion of adaptation, I also agree with Caron’s assertion that “memory institutions [must] ensure access just as much as ensuring the preservation and documentation of culture”. We live in an integrated and networked local and global world and national institutions should be reflective of this.
In terms of the future, there are many problems with Caron’s idea that value must be assigned at the point of creation. The Social Justice Librarian blog (http://sjlibrarian.wordpress.com/2009/09/10/caron%E2%80%99s-lac-modernisation-message-huh/) echoes this concern back in September 2009 when Caron was appointed as Librarian and Archivist of Canada. A blogger stated that they were “concerned that access to information will take a backseat” and “that documents may be disposed of under principles other than those of the archival or library communities”. From September 2009 to the present two other important information blogs have remained silent on this issue: OLA’s Meeting Space Blog (http://www.accessola3.com/index.php?app=blog&blogid=9&showentry=619) and
CLA-CASLIS blog (http://caslisottawainformation.blogspot.com/) for information professionals in the Ottawa area. If Caron would look upon “value” not with an economist’s eyes but rather an archaeologist’s or an historian’s eyes, then the idea of what is valued can be flipped on its head. For example, in the High Middle Ages and early Renaissance, historians can derive oodles of social, economic and cultural information from….cookbooks. At the time of creation, they were composed to aid cooks in preparing meals. Now, the inclusion or exclusion of certain ingredients or spices can dictate to a historian the political and economic climate of Europe, what trade routes were open or closed relationships of power, etc. Another problem of value is that material that was deemed value-less in the past has accrued an inherent value in the present: the middens of ancient cultures. Archaeologists can make a variety of deductions and conclusions in studying the middens or “garbage piles” of ancient cultures. Here, what was considered value-less at point of creation is now valuable.
I think that discussing the 21st century challenges for knowledge and memory institutions and their preservation/collection policies will be important in the future. I feel that “fearlessness in leadership” must also be tempered with the ability to look at a multifaceted situation with different perspectives constantly and consistently. Only then will a national institution like the National Library and Archives Canada be able to adequately collect and preserve information in a variety of formats for generations to come.
Name: Greg Hayward
IWB Sesssion: Second Session (Panel Discussion)
Speaker: Carla Heggie, Dwight Fischer, & Sandy Housell
Topic: Privacy in the digital age
This past Thursday I attended the Information Without Borders (IWB) Conference, an annual conference put on by students of SIM. Overall, the speakers were very interesting but I would like to specifically address the second session which consisted of a panel discussion titled “privacy in the digital”. The panel was made up of Carla Heggie, Information Access & Privacy Manager, Nova Scotia Labor and Workforce Development; Sandy Housel, Senior Outreach Advisor, Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada; and Dwight Fischer, Assistant Vice-President and CIO, Dalhousie University. Much of the conversation centered on how to control the vast amounts of information being created and disseminated electronically. Some of the issues discussed included the ubiquity of mobile technologies and the affect of consumer behavior and expectations on the security of personal information.
Both Carla Heggie and Sandy Housell put a lot of emphasis on the need for individuals to be proactive in securing their privacy. As Ms. Heggie pointed out, once a security breach has occurred it is impossible to undo. Because of the speed at which information can travel it nearly impossible for someone to control it once it has been released into the online environment. Mr. Housell also made an important point, stating, we often look to technology to fix the problem by creating better security programs, unfortunately no matter how much security you put up it will not stop privacy breaches as the majority are a result of human actions. To add to this Mr. Fischer, speaking from the perspective of someone operating within an environment where literally tens of thousands of peoples private information is stored on his institutions server, spoke about the infeasibility of placing security measures on every aspect of peoples online activity. He stated that the university is now focusing its security controls on information in regards to payments and enrollment which means less focus in areas such as e-mail. The panelists seemed to agree that reliance on technology can only go so far in protecting people’s privacy.
I would argue that the same can be said for information policy. At best information policies can help guide people’s actions but they can never stop someone from creating or causing a privacy breach, especially when they occur involuntarily. The Privacy commissioner of Canada released a report in February 2008 which addresses just this issue in regard to the creation of virtual profiles. When people create virtual profiles they have a certain level of expectation that the information they are providing to a site is still owned and controlled by them. However, this is not the case at all and people end up giving away private information without knowing where it is actually going. Furthermore, virtual profiles can be created without intention. A recent court ruling in the U.S. demonstrates just how little control we have over any private content put on the web. In the decision judges ruled in favour of upholding a decision to overturn a senior high school students suspension for creating a “parody” profile of his principal on MySpace. The profile was created using a picture from the schools website and was filled in with false and defaming information about the principal. Furthermore, once the profile was created within the next week four more profiles for the principal appeared using the same photo. This demonstrates how without even putting any textual information about ourselves online we can still be susceptible to identity theft and defamation. While the principal could have taken legal actions against these students it is really a case of the damage being done and the actions of the students cannot be reversed by any judge’s ruling.
Policies are usually developed in response to some action that has taken place. For instance, when Canada’s privacy commissioner expressed concern with how Facebook stored information from deleted profiles, or, more recently in relation to the release of Google’s buzz application through gmail. The lesson to be learned from these instances is that we cannot rely on government or industry to protect our privacy online. As the IWB panel reiterated again and again the security of private information needs to begin with the individual. By being aware of security issues and insuring that we keep track of the information that we put online we can have at least some control over our privacy.
As the internet becomes more pervasive in our personal, social, and professional lives we need to be ever more cautious about how we supply information about ourselves in the online environment (not to mention our personal mobile devices). As communications move online it is easy to forget or even know where and how all of the data in our e-mails, tweets, and Facebook status updates is being stored. While information policy and security will remain important aspects of controlling privacy online there is no better deterrent than being aware of what information we release about ourselves. The responsibility for privacy in the digital age should not reside with governments or security companies but needs to come from individuals.