Demonstrate awareness of the ethics, values, and foundational principles of one of the information professions, and discuss the importance of those principles within that profession.

Introduction and Explication

Ethics are the “set of principles that guide decision-making in a specific setting” (Garnar, 2018, p. 367). General ethical principles represent those moral values and rules common across various societies and cultures and include the principles of non-harm; autonomy; fairness, responsibility; and beneficence (Garner, 2018, p. 367; Mooradian, 2018, p. xv; 4). In an informed, democratic society, these principles underpin a human-rights-centered governance system enforced at the individual and societal levels through laws, standards, codes, and policies. 

Professionals possess specialized knowledge and expertise and, as such, are invested with trust and autonomy by stakeholders seeking the resolution of problems dependent upon that knowledge and expertise (Mooradian, 2018, pp. 44-46; 62). Defined by self-governing professional organizations, codes of ethics guide members’ conduct and decision-making within the contexts of their organizational missions and daily work activities (Garnar, 2018, p. 367; Mooradian, 2018, p. xvii; 44). 

Information professionals achieve their professional mandate by centering their decision-making around the ethical principles of access and use; confidentiality and privacy; democracy; diversity; education and lifelong learning; intellectual freedom; preservation; professionalism; public good; service; and social responsibility (Garnar, 2018, p. 369-372; Marek, 2018, p. 357). Professional organizations enshrine these principles in documents such as the American Library Association’s (ALA) Code of Ethics (2021); the Society of American Archivists (SAA) Core Values Statement and Code of Ethics (2020); and the SAA Statement on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (2016). 

Archival Ethics

Professional archivists strive to identify, preserve, organize, maintain, provide equitable access to, and support interpretations of, records in their care (Society of American Archivists, 2020). A user-centered, service-oriented field grounded in evidence-based theory, archivists and other information professionals are directed by the field’s ethical principles as they navigate the identification, description, and preservation of “essential records that document evidence of human activity and social organization…for the benefit of current and future generations” (Society of American Archivists, 2020).

Society of American Archivists: Statement of Core Values and Code of Ethics

“The Society of American Archivists is a membership organization comprising individuals and organizations dedicated to the selection, care, preservation, access to, and administration of historical and documentary records of enduring value for the benefit of current and future generations” (Society of American Archivists, 2020). The SAA’s Statement of Core Values and Code of Ethics (2020) is a set of high-level concepts and rules by which archivists may achieve transparent, accountable, and reliable best practices in professional environments. This ethical code informs and supports the activities and decision-making of archivists, and facilitates the ethical resolution of problems commonly encountered in daily work, with the “goal of [moving] the profession toward a more inclusive, ethical, and accountable community of archival practice” (Mooradian, 2018 p. xv; Society of American Archivists, 2020). Core archival values outlined in this document include access and use; accountability; advocacy; and diversity; history and memory; preservation; responsible stewardship; selection; service; social responsibility; and sustainability (Society of American Archivists, 2020). 

Impartiality, Information Privacy, & Policy Making 

A key aspect of ethical archival practice is the recognition that neutrality and impartiality are impossible goals (Jimerson, 2005). As Terry Cook (2011, p. 175-176), explains, where once archives and archivists were viewed as passive and objective keepers of primary sources, they have evolved into active and subjective participants in the interpretation of the historical narrative. “Archives,” Cook (2011, p. 175) states, “are part of a societal and governance process of remembering and forgetting, of concern about power and margins, in which the archivist consciously embrace[s] a more visible role in co-creating the archive, not just being the curator of what was left over.” In essence, the ethical archivist recognizes - and documents - that their work directly influences the interpretation and application of society’s evidence-based historical record (Society of American Archivists, 2020). 

Defined as individual human control over the creation, use, access to, and sharing of personal information by governments and organizations, information privacy is “one of the central, if not the central, ethical issues of the information age” (Mooradian, 2018, p. 119-120). This concern is particularly salient for users of complex, socio-technical technologies such as machine learning and deep learning algorithms such as generative artificial intelligence (e.g., ChatGPT), which train on large datasets because these AI algorithms are not designed with data privacy guarantees and, therefore, are at great risk of violating the ethical principles underpinning their data subjects’ legally guaranteed privacy rights (Daniels, 2023). Ethical issues emerging from the use of complex AI algorithms and technologies include lack of clarity about data ownership; stakeholders’ inability to fully understand how their data may be used, reused, and misused; perpetuation of human programmers’ biases and discriminatory practices; and ubiquitous and persistent surveillance (Bartneck et al., 2021). 

Marek (2018, p. 357) explains that professional ethics are the foundation of effective policies which “enable civil liberties” (Marek, 2018, p. 357). Therefore, as a form of applied ethics, archival policies reflect the information needs of constituents and internal stakeholders within the contexts of society’s laws, regulations, and standards. As user-centered, service-oriented professionals, archivists have an ethical duty to transparently communicate and uphold the rules and best practices expected by society and our organizations. Effective  policy making enables us to meet our professional mandate to preserve, maintain, and ensure equitable access and use of our collections in support of intellectual freedom and accountability (Mooradian, 2018, p. 46).

Evidence

Evidence 1: Archival Stakeholders, Copyright, and Fair Use Links to an external site.

Written as a discussion post for my seminar in Ethics for Archivists and Records and Information Management Professionals (MARA 284, Su21), Archival Stakeholders, Copyright, and Fair Use addresses the rights of researchers to access and use archival materials protected by copyright law. I explain that, while intellectual freedom rests at the heart of the archival mission, copyright law may restrict use of “works of original authorship…fixed in some tangible form” when a collection’s donor or creator retains copyright ownership for some or all of the works in an accessioned collection (Intellectual Property Working Group, n.d.; Society of American Archivists, 2020). However, because access and use of archival records is of benefit to society, archives and archival staff are excepted from aspects of copyright law when operating within the scope of our professional duties (Society of American Archivists, 2020). Enabling researcher access and use of these materials requires coordination between the archives and copyright owner. Ideally, this coordination occurs at the time of accessioning. 

While copyright law protects the rights of a copyright owner, ethical, user-centered archivists recognize that the information needs and rights of their stakeholders drive their organizational missions, policies, and practices. We advocate for expansive access to and use of archival materials because doing so promotes intellectual freedom and benefits society (Society of American Archivists, 2020). As such, we understand the legal doctrine of fair use, which allows the reproduction and distribution of copyrighted works in archival collections if certain conditions are met, including but not limited to use of material for non-profit educational reasons, the nature of the work;  the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and whether or not fair use would negatively impact the market value of the works to the copyright owner (U.S. Copyright Office, 2023).

Ethical archivists ensure internal stakeholders are informed about the impact of copyright law on access and use of archival materials and draft relevant organizational policies and procedures to that end. Further, we proactively and transparently inform all stakeholders about access and use restrictions related to copyright law by ensuring that policies are posted in highly visible areas in physical and digital environments. By articulating how copyright law and the fair use doctrine impact stakeholder access and use of archival materials, and the ethical strategies and best practices archivists use to achieve the greatest benefit to researchers, this discussion post articulates my knowledge and skills as relates to Competency A.

Evidence 2: Politicians, Privacy, and the Public Interest Links to an external site.

Politicians, Privacy, and the Public Interest is a blog post I created for an assignment in my Archives & Manuscripts (Info 256, Su21) course in which I was asked, “what should you do when, in working on the arrangement and description of a collection, you come across a piece of information that is of a highly sensitive nature and could change the perception of a major (still living) political figure?” The piece is a step-by-step description of the decision-making process I undertook to complete the assignment and includes a discussion of relevant ethical, legal, and organizational policy requirements and procedures.  

Professional archivists protect and promote democratic society, open government, and the public’s right to know (Jimerson, 2007). We value intellectual freedom and seek to expand and diversify users’ access and use of our collections, by “promot[ing] open and equitable access to [our] services and the records in [our] care without discrimination or preferential treatment, and in accordance with legal requirements, cultural sensitivities, and institutional policies” (Society of American Archivists, 2020). We believe in knowledge sharing. There are situations, however, which require deeper reflection and conscious reliance on our ethical principles. 

The discovery of highly sensitive personal information in an archival record requires that the archivist determine if the information is personally identifiable (PII). If so, it falls under the protection of the Privacy Act of 1974 and should be redacted or access restrictions applied (Serrao, 2018). Additionally, the archivist should determine if it is exempt from Freedom of Information Act requests and/or protected under copyright law (Smith, 2012). For clarification the archivist will review confidentiality agreements, deeds of gift, and donor agreements between the donor and the archives.

Beyond the legal limitations for PII, living public figures are held to a different standard of privacy than are private citizens due to their special ability to manipulate and control public discourse (Yanisky-Ravid & Lahav, 2017). Regarding public officials specifically, “the archival community and its allied professions must be ever vigilant in helping to ensure that citizens have all the requisite information to make informed decisions about the activities of their government” (Jimerson, 2007).

The archivist will likely decide to consult with organizational leadership before making the information available.  As such, prior to making this sensitive information openly accessible and usable, the archivist must determine if the individual is a willing public figure and if the information occurs within the context of that figure’s public role (Yanisky-Ravid & Lahav, 2017). All archival decisions, actions, and transactions should be documented and maintained with the sensitive information throughout its life. 

This assignment meets the criteria for Competency A in that it reflects my capacity to ethically analyze an archival dilemma within the context of the SAA’s values and ethical code, relevant laws, regulations, donor document, and organizational policies. It highlights my ethical commitment to an informed, democratic society, through access and use of trustworthy archival collections. Further, it represents my professional duty to advocate for the public interest by providing documentary evidence that “create conditions of accountability” for individuals and groups (including the processing archivist/s) represented in collections within the scope of the law but regardless of social status and power (Mooradian, 2018, p. 51-53).

Evidence 3: Proposed Policy Addendum to SAA Code of Ethics: Adapting the Archival Lexicon Links to an external site.

A supplement to the SAA’s Statement of Core Values and Code of Ethics (2020), the SAA’s Statement Reaffirming Our Commitment to the Importance of Diversity and Inclusion, states that it is the professional duty and responsibility of the archivist “to preserve and provide access to a documentary record that protects rights, supports accountability, and reflects the diversity of society as a whole” (Society of American Archivists, 2016). With this ethics-based statement in mind, I crafted this proposed policy addendum to the SAA Code of Ethics for my seminar in Ethics for Archivists and Records and Information Management Professionals (MARA 284, Su21).

The document addresses the issue of systemic oppression and exclusion of vulnerable populations supported by the current, mainstream archival lexicon. Written in Summer 2021, amidst the sharp rise in violence associated with white nationalism in the US, it represents my comprehension of the ethical principles and values espoused by the SAA within the context of the first U.S. National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism (White House, 2021). I argue that intentional revision of archival terminology contributes directly to the mitigation of further harms caused by exclusionary archival terminology; enhances the profession’s transparency, trustworthiness, and accountability in civil society; and equitably and reliably facilitates the rights-based principles of autonomy, fairness, responsibility, and beneficence for all peoples (Mooradian, 2018).

This assignment functions as evidence of Competency A in that it underscores my professional integrity and my capacity to translate ethical issues related to diversity, equity, and inclusion in archival practices into transparent, accountable, and socially responsible policies reflective of the values and best practices of the profession. Further, it represents my commitment to, and advocacy for, equitable representation in, access to, and use of, a multivocal historical record which enhances opportunities for greater intellectual freedom for a broader audience and encourages inclusivity and diversity within the archival community itself (Marek, 2018, p. 359; Society of American Archivists, 2020).

Conclusion

As ethics-directed professionals with a public service mission to broadly and equitably meet the information needs of our stakeholders, archivists recognize the impact of our work, and our own biases, on historical memory and social identity (International Council on Archives, 2021). Fortunately, the Society of American Archives’ Statement of Core Values and Code of Ethics (2020) provides clear, high-level professional guidance with which its’ members may grapple with the ethical problems that arise during policy development and our daily work. It is crucial that the ethical archivist understand that the application of this ethical framework is an iterative, subjective process that takes time but which “allows you to expand and deepen your knowledge of the ethical issue” and make decisions which uphold the fundamental human rights that define and enable a just, democratic society (Cook, 2011, p. 176; Mooradian, 2018, p. 41). 

References

American Library Association. (2021, June 29). Professional ethics: Code of ethics. American Library Association. https://www.ala.org/tools/ethics Links to an external site.

Bartneck, C., Lütge, C., Wagner, A., & Welsh, S. (2021). An introduction to ethics in robotics and AI. In SpringerBriefs in Ethics. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51110-4 Links to an external site.

Cook, T. (2011). “We are what we keep; we keep what we are”: Archival appraisal past, present and future. Journal of the Society of Archivists, 32(2), 173–189. https://doi.org/10.1080/00379816.2011.619688 Links to an external site.

Daniels, J. (2023, May 1). How generative AI can affect your business’ data privacy. Forbes. https://tinyurl.com/yvk7y34r Links to an external site.

Garnar, M. L. (2018). Information ethics. In S. Hirsch (Ed.), Information services today: an introduction (pp. 366–377). Rowman & Littlefield.

Intellectual Property Working Group. (n.d.). Copyright and unpublished material. Society of American Archivists. https://www2.archivists.org/publications/brochures/copyright-and-unpublished-material Links to an external site.

International Council on Archives. (2021). Our mission and objectives. ICA. https://www.ica.org/discover-ica/our-mission-our-objectives/ Links to an external site.

Jimerson, R. (2005, August 18). Embracing the power of archives. Society of American Archivists. https://www2.archivists.org/history/leaders/randall-c-jimerson/embracing-the-power-of-archives Links to an external site.

Jimerson, R. (2007). Archives for all: Professional responsibility and social justice. American archivist, 70(2), 252–281. https://doi.org/10.17723/aarc.70.2.5n20760751v643m7 Links to an external site.

Marek, K. (2018). Information policy. In S. Hirsch (Ed.), Information services today: an introduction (pp. 357–365). Rowman & Littlefield.

Mooradian, N. A. (2018). Ethics for records and information management. ALA Neal-Schuman.

Serrao, J. L. (2018, March 27). Ethics in archives: How special collections protects your privacy. NC State University Libraries. https://www.lib.ncsu.edu/news/special-collections/ethics-in-archives%3A-how-special-collections-protects-your-privacy Links to an external site.

Smith, K. L. (2012). Copyright risk management: Principles and strategies for large-scale digitization projects in special collections. Research Library Issues: A quarterly report from ARL, CNI, and SPARC, 279, 17–23. https://doi.org/10.29242/rli.279.6 Links to an external site.

U.S. Copyright Office. (2023, February). Fair use index. Www.copyright.gov. https://www.copyright.gov/fair-use/#:~:text=Fair%20use%20is%20a%20legal Links to an external site.

White House, The. (2021, June 15). Fact sheet: National strategy for countering domestic terrorism. The White House. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/06/15/fact-sheet-national-strategy-for-countering-domestic-terrorism/ Links to an external site.

Yanisky-Ravid, S., & Lahav, B. Z. (2017). Public interest vs. private lives – Affording public figures privacy in the digital era: The three principle filtering model. University of Pennsylvania journal of constitutional law, 19(4), 975–1014.