The Distance Between Our Values and Actions: We Can’t Be Passive When it Comes to Privacy

Meredith Farkas
{"title":"The Distance Between Our Values and Actions: We Can’t Be Passive When it Comes to Privacy","authors":"Meredith Farkas","doi":"10.5399/osu/1093-7374.27.01.10","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In September 2021, the WOC+Lib collective published a searing \"Statement Against White Appropriation of Black, Indigenous, and People of Color's Labor (BIPOC),\" decrying the exploitation and abuse of BIPOC library workers. One of the many hypocrisies the group took issue with was: \nthe proliferation of anti-racism statements put out by information institutions and organizations in 2020 without also taking on actions addressing the lack of Black, Indigenous, or People of Color workers or how the BIPOC within those very libraries and organizations have been ostracised and disrespected for years prior to 2020, while allowing the mistreatment to continue. (WOC+Lib, 2021) \nIn the midst of the international uprisings for racial justice following the murder of George Floyd, many libraries put out antiracist statements affirming their commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). Yet in a recent survey of library directors, only 31 percent of academic library directors agreed that their “library has well-developed equity, diversity, inclusion, and accessibility strategies for employees\" (Frederick and Wolff-Eisenberg, 2021, p. 10). The lack of progress made in these areas suggests that while diversity may be a library value, dismantling systems of oppression to improve DEI is not a top priority at most institutions.","PeriodicalId":298209,"journal":{"name":"OLA Quarterly","volume":"187 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"OLA Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5399/osu/1093-7374.27.01.10","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

In September 2021, the WOC+Lib collective published a searing "Statement Against White Appropriation of Black, Indigenous, and People of Color's Labor (BIPOC)," decrying the exploitation and abuse of BIPOC library workers. One of the many hypocrisies the group took issue with was: the proliferation of anti-racism statements put out by information institutions and organizations in 2020 without also taking on actions addressing the lack of Black, Indigenous, or People of Color workers or how the BIPOC within those very libraries and organizations have been ostracised and disrespected for years prior to 2020, while allowing the mistreatment to continue. (WOC+Lib, 2021) In the midst of the international uprisings for racial justice following the murder of George Floyd, many libraries put out antiracist statements affirming their commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). Yet in a recent survey of library directors, only 31 percent of academic library directors agreed that their “library has well-developed equity, diversity, inclusion, and accessibility strategies for employees" (Frederick and Wolff-Eisenberg, 2021, p. 10). The lack of progress made in these areas suggests that while diversity may be a library value, dismantling systems of oppression to improve DEI is not a top priority at most institutions.
我们的价值观和行动之间的距离:在隐私问题上我们不能被动
2021年9月,WOC+Lib集体发表了一份措辞激烈的“反对白人挪用黑人、土著和有色人种劳动的声明”,谴责对BIPOC图书馆工作人员的剥削和虐待。该组织所指责的众多虚伪行为之一是:信息机构和组织在2020年发布了大量反种族主义声明,却没有采取行动解决黑人、土著或有色人种工作者缺乏的问题,也没有采取行动解决这些图书馆和组织中的BIPOC在2020年之前多年受到排斥和不尊重的问题,同时允许虐待继续下去。(WOC+Lib, 2021)在乔治·弗洛伊德(George Floyd)被谋杀后的国际种族正义起义中,许多图书馆发表了反种族主义声明,肯定了他们对多样性、公平和包容(DEI)的承诺。然而,在最近对图书馆馆长的一项调查中,只有31%的学术图书馆馆长同意他们的“图书馆为员工制定了完善的公平、多样性、包容性和无障碍战略”(Frederick and Wolff-Eisenberg, 2021, p. 10)。在这些领域缺乏进展表明,虽然多样性可能是图书馆的价值,但在大多数机构中,拆除压迫系统以改善DEI并不是最优先考虑的事情。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信