<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>I would like to hopefully initiate a broader conversation about
privacy and library ethics, not just with library leadership, but
the entire public library community in Ohio. I'm having flashbacks
of Mark Zuckerberg testifying in front of Congress, when it was
painfully obvious that most legislators didn't have a clue what he
was saying or what types of questions could/should be asked. I
know we have many competent leaders in the library community, but
also a vast wealth of knowledge in our other co-workers,
particularly those with a high degree of tech skills. I also want
to thank you, Don, for identifying this as a major problem and
spreading the word. My words below are <b>bolded. </b><br>
</p>
<p><b>Disclaimer #1: I've been using and loving Lynda.com. I've
vastly improved my knowledge of music theory and various
software. </b><b><br>
</b></p>
<p><b>Disclaimer #2: I've been off of facebook for around 18 months,
and I feel like my brain has finally been returned to me. I
believe strongly that social media, in its current form, as well
as the associated behavioral algorithms, the contents of which
are mostly hidden from public view, are influencing us to be
dumber, meaner, more likely to buy useless stuff, waste our
time, and compromise our true values.</b></p>
<p><b>Also, please correct me if you believe any of my comments are
incorrect. </b><br>
</p>
<p><b>These companies, including LinkedIn, are virtually unregulated
and devoid of any meaningful set of ethics, other than pursuing
growth and profit. As public companies, most of their corporate
charters contain clauses which allow for the CEO to be sued, if
they put anything above the pursuit of profit. Most of the
venture capitalists that have supplied the startup funds for
these companies are expecting a 100x return on investment, and
they've reached a breaking point where they have to put up or
shut up....monetize, monetize, monetize. Grow, grow, grow. The
easiest way to monetize these services is by selling the data
they collect from users. The data they collect from our patrons
will be much more lucrative to them than even the value of our
contract. There is currently a digital gold rush to get as much
data as possible. In other words, they're operating from a very
different set of motivations than public libraries. </b><b><br>
</b></p>
<p><b>I have some questions and comments about the material from the
transition link:</b><br>
</p>
<p>"While for-profit companies which provide library information
services have, for years, been collecting and processing patron
information (e.g. OverDrive, Hoopla, Demco’s line of library
software), and in some cases linking to external social media
accounts, never before has a social media account been required
for use of library-paid resources. OPLIN staff raised our
objections with Lynda/LinkedIn Learning representatives when we
were informed in December of plans for this new requirement."</p>
<p><b>Restated, this points out that we're all already compromised,
in some way. We've invested heavily in companies that are
exploiting our users. This doesn't mean it's right or that we
don't still need to watch these companies closely. Remember the
sunk cost fallacy. I know of at least one attempt of Overdrive,
which is now owned by a multi-national media conglomerate called
Rakuten, approached the Ohio Digital Library with a proposal to
integrate a service called "Viber," which is essentially
Rakuten's version of WhatsApp. They billed it as a book
discussion platform, which would be opt-in for patrons. Their
privacy policy is problematic, and it contains a clause that
basically says the policy can change if they're acquired by a
third party. This plan was ultimately rejected, as far as I
know. Is this what just happened with LinkedIn and Lynda?</b><br>
</p>
<p>"No threat on OPLIN's part Is likely to alter LinkedIn's
course..."</p>
<p><b>Do they care about us renewing the contract at the end of the
term? Would collected protest/action and negative publicity by a
majority of Ohio librarians alter their course? Would pulling
promotion of the product or spreading information about avoiding
LinkedIn and their associated products make a difference? These
are some of the options we should be considering. I would love
to hear what other library leaders are considering/planning.
After all, we're still the same group that resisted National
Security Letters from the FBI, right? Does anyone know if ALA
will be getting involved? </b><br>
</p>
<p>"In subsequent discussion, the Committee determined that while
requiring a LinkedIn account was abhorrent, the value of the
resource was such that OPLIN should maintain the subscription,
particularly as those libraries which had previously provided
Lynda.com could not, mid-year, pick up this relatively expensive
subscription for themselves. The OPLIN Board of Trustees
concurred."</p>
<p><b>So, is this another way of saying that money trumps values?
Are we all selling out our patrons, now? Quick experiment, if
you're interested: see if you can find a teenager that knows
what "sellout" means. And, again, if anyone's interested in the
definition of the sunk cost fallacy: </b><br>
</p>
<p><b><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/sunk-cost-fallacy">https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/sunk-cost-fallacy</a></b><br>
</p>
<p>"LinkedIn has, in fact, been praised for its compliance with the
European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the
plain-language clarity of its data privacy policies, and the tools
LinkedIn provides its users for control over their personal
information. Of course, effective usage of these tools requires a
degree of information literacy that novice users have not
developed. And without access to a working LinkedIn Learning for
Libraries platform, no one has been able to begin developing
guides to help librarians help their patrons." <br>
</p>
<p><b>It's not just that novice users haven't developed this level
of information literacy. Virtually no one has. I have a LinkeIn
account from years ago, so I logged in. It's true that if you
dig into the settings, you have some control of what you share.
But, typically, and displayed prominently on the dashboard,
there are messages and banners and interfaces encouraging you to
share more, telling the user that their profile is "incomplete,"
and that by giving up more information, the service will be so
much better and improve their lives. The European law still
doesn't go far enough, because it only covers "personally
identifiable information." But, they don't need your name to
push their products and influence your behavior. Some of the
most lucrative sections of this new digital economy are
comprised of "anonymized data," which is another way of saying
"everything about you, besides your name/specific address,"
without your opt-in permission. Again, though, they will make it
extremely attractive to opt-in and more painful to avoid opting
in. </b><b>And they and their partners can target you, without
knowing your name, based on the other attributes you supply. <br>
</b></p>
<p><b>Then, there's this from the FAQ:</b></p>
<p>
<span><dt style="-en-clipboard:true;"><span style="font-style:
italic;">"Will all the stats and information I currently
have at Lynda Admin transfer over to LinkedIn Learning?</span></dt>
<dd><br>
</dd>
<dd><span>Not all of it. After the change, libraries will no
longer have access to some user learning activity (such as
certificates earned) or personally identifiable information
(such as email addresses). You will have access to basic use
metrics: number of users, number of videos, etc. OPLIN has
collected these basic usage statistics for all libraries
since July 2019. If you want more detailed information or a
longer history of stats, please visit the <a
href="https://www.lynda.com/ReportsDashboard"
target="_blank">Lynda Reports Dashboard</a> and download
the reports you need."</span></dd>
</span>
</p>
<p><span><dt></dt>
<dt></dt>
</span>
</p>
<p><b>If I'm not mistaken, this means that LinkedIn will
automatically have MORE data about our patrons than WE do. If we
select another product at the end of this contract, this would
make it much more difficult to contact our Lynda users to notify
them of the alternative. This also might mean we won't be able
to see the most popular certificates our patrons are pursuing,
so that we can use this info in selecting an alternative. While
we're in this period of uncertainty, I would recommend getting a
list of your patrons using the service, so that you can
communicate with them on short notice. Will LinkedIn be using
these email addresses to promote Premium subscriptions? Will
they use it to maintain the user base, in the event we cancel
the contract? </b><br>
<u></u></p>
<p>
<span><dt style="-en-clipboard:true;"><span style="font-style:
italic;">"I have concerns about the privacy of patron
information that is to be shared with LinkedIn.</span></dt>
<dd><span>Online privacy is important, and it is good for
librarians to inform themselves and to help educate their
patrons. In part, LinkedIn is moving the Lynda.com
information within the LinkedIn environment to strengthen
protections around user data, and to provide Lynda users
with better tools for managing how their information may and
may not be used."</span></dd>
</span>
<p><b>When these tech startups, and even Apple, use language like
"strengthen protections around user data" and "better tools
for managing how their information may and may not be used,"
while simultaneously pushing a change that will require or
encourage us to provide more information, it's important to
read between the lines. In reality, this means more
opportunities for each user to elect to share. If there are 25
toggles for different sharing options, it increases the
possibility that many of those will be toggled "on" without
the user having any real knowledge of the implications. </b><br>
</p>
<p><b>My final question is this: what section of our contract with
Lynda/LinkedIn gives them the justification for imposing this
requirement on the library community? I think we should all
see the exact language, since we routinely negotiate contracts
with private entities. Who knows, maybe Sirsi-Dynix will soon
require us all to have Instagrams, in order to use our library
catalog. The longer our partnerships endure, the harder it
will be to break away, if we don't adequately plan for
alternatives. We've seen facebook's strategy of introducing
distasteful changes in small increments, in order to limit
backlash, and it's reasonable to assume others will employ the
same strategy. What's our plan for keeping them as honest as
possible? An open source and/or nonprofit alternative to as
many of these services as possible would be wonderful, as well
as pressuring legislators for more regulation. </b><br>
</p>
</p>
<p><b><u>Suggested Podcast Episodes</u></b></p>
<p><b>"Why Should We Care About Privacy?" - Crazy/Genius by The
Atlantic</b></p>
<p><b><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://pca.st/z49Q">https://pca.st/z49Q</a></b></p>
<p><b>"What Happened in Vegas" - Your Undivided Attention by The
Center for Humane Technology</b></p>
<p><b><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://pca.st/u0MD">https://pca.st/u0MD</a></b><b><br>
</b></p>
<p><b><u>Suggested Books</u></b></p>
<p><b>The Age of Surveillance Capitalism by Shoshana Zuboff</b></p>
<p><b>Team Human by Douglas Rushkoff</b></p>
<p><b>Throwing Rocks at the Google Bus by Douglas Rushkoff<br>
</b></p>
<p><b>Digital Minimalism by Cal Newport</b></p>
<p><b>And the website for Center for Humane Technology, which is
mostly comprised of former tech insiders and CEOs...with extremely
guilty consciences:</b></p>
<p><b><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://humanetech.com/">https://humanetech.com/</a></b></p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">Sincerely,
Nicholas Slone
Executive Director
Adams County Public Library</pre>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 6/8/2019 10:12 AM, Don Yarman via
OPLINLIST wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CANmd0myEmhMv00rxWBjOx-xAcgGGXqZFKzcaDGgYQ33va6ETzw@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">There is a growing chorus of concern over Lynda.com
becoming LinkedIn Learning, and the new requirement for library
users to have LinkedIn accounts to continue using the resource.
(Please see the announcement at <a
href="https://oplin.ohio.gov/lynda-transition"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://oplin.ohio.gov/lynda-transition</a>.)
That is good—it is the duty of librarians to safeguard the
information lives of their patrons. While for-profit companies
which provide library information services have, for years, been
collecting and processing patron information (e.g. OverDrive,
Hoopla, Demco’s line of library software), and in some cases
linking to external social media accounts, never before has a
social media account been required for use of library-paid
resources. OPLIN staff raised our objections with Lynda/LinkedIn
Learning representatives when we were informed in December of
plans for this new requirement.<br>
<br>
It was not until the end of March that the company delivered a
presentation about LinkedIn Learning for Libraries. OPLIN’s <a
href="https://oplin.ohio.gov/CAC" moz-do-not-send="true">Content
Advisory Committee</a> attended this webinar, and offered
LinkedIn staff their suggestions and their frank opinions. In
subsequent discussion, the Committee determined that while
requiring a LinkedIn account was abhorrent, the value of the
resource was such that OPLIN should maintain the subscription,
particularly as those libraries which had previously provided
Lynda.com could not, mid-year, pick up this relatively expensive
subscription for themselves. The OPLIN Board of Trustees
concurred.<br>
<br>
OPLIN and its peer organizations across North America continue
to press LinkedIn for changes that will align more closely with
library ethics concerning patron data. It is important to note
two things:<br>
<ol>
<li>LinkedIn’s practices are not illegal. State laws governing
library patron information address only the disclosure, by
libraries, of <i>library records</i>; they do not cover the
personal information that users of library services
themselves provide to library vendors.</li>
<li>No threat on OPLIN’s part to end our agreement is likely
to alter LinkedIn’s course for the future of Lynda content
access. (It is rather more likely that LinkedIn would take
legal action to hold OPLIN to its original agreement to
maintain the subscription through June 2021.)</li>
</ol>
LinkedIn has, in fact, been praised for its compliance with the
European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the
plain-language clarity of its data privacy policies, and the
tools LinkedIn provides its users for control over their
personal information. Of course, effective usage of these tools
requires a degree of information literacy that novice users have
not developed. And without access to a working LinkedIn Learning
for Libraries platform, no one has been able to begin developing
guides to help librarians help their patrons. <br>
<br>
OPLIN’s services are funded directly from public library money,
and we strive to align those services with guidance we receive
from the public library community. The guidance we have received
so far indicates that library decision-makers are disturbed by
this change, but saw a greater value in having OPLIN continue to
provide statewide access to the content.
<div><br>
<div>
<div dir="ltr"> Don Yarman<br>
Director, Ohio Public Library
Information Network<br>
2323 W Fifth Ave Suite 130, Columbus
OH 43204<br>
<a href="mailto:don@oplin.ohio.gov"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">don@oplin.ohio.gov</a> |
614.728.5250<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
OPLINLIST mailing list -- <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:OPLINLIST@lists.oplin.org">OPLINLIST@lists.oplin.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.oplin.org/mailman/listinfo/oplinlist">http://lists.oplin.org/mailman/listinfo/oplinlist</a>
*** OPLIN now offers a Tier III-rated data center for libraries to use. Find out more: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.oplin.ohio.gov/co-location-service">https://www.oplin.ohio.gov/co-location-service</a> ***
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>