How can library and information professionals fight mis and disinformation? What do you believe ALIA’s role is in this?
The first point to make is that misinformation and disinformation are different things, and need different approaches:
- misinformation is false information, it may or may not be intentional, it’s incorrect, and can be refuted;
- disinformation is deliberately misleading, this is the dangerous propaganda end of the spectrum – I don’t want to sound conspiratorial here, but it does demand serious attention because its intention is to deceive.
Re misinformation –
Finding correct information is our bread and butter, it’s our raison d’etre, and we’re good at it. It’s Reference services 101 – the first step is to refine the question, then find the evidence from reputable and authoritative sources, and document your evidence base. So in a sense, the answer is to do what we do as the guardians of good evidence-based information, the information warriors of this age, and do it well. We can be proud of the role we play in a democratic society, which depends on free access to good information.
Re disinformation –
You have to first ask why and how there is deliberate dissemination of false information, and then, what can be done? There are different motivations, the most obvious is the spin used by marketers and others aimed at making a commercial profit, gaining political power, or increasing social influence; at the other extreme are the sinister and destructive campaigns that undermine the fabric of civil society.
· There are “esmart” tools and programs available through government agencies and other organisations, to alert consumers to disinformation threats; libraries can be proactive in disseminating this information;
· I realise that “more training” is often invoked as the solution to difficult problems – and we already do information literacy and media literacy training for our clients. On top of that, I believe that we should be teaching people to think critically and logically, able to call out fallacies of argument. For example, it’s not ok to “argue against the person” (not the issue), but how often do we see this done? It’s not ok to draw a comparison of “moral equivalence” to argue a case for an unsavoury course of action. If fallacies of argument can be identified, it’s less likely that people will be sucked into believing spurious claims.
One of the outcomes of the proliferation of mis- and disinformation is a loss of trust in the authority of professionals and integrity of organisations. Information is at the core of this debate. While not able to combat the insidiousness of disinformation on its own, ALIA, as the peak body for information professionals, has an important role to play in the information infrastructure needed for a functioning democratic society.
· ALIA must model sound information governance and evidence-based practice. It’d be a powerful statement to be able to point to our professional association and say “do it like this”.
· An advocacy campaign along the lines of librarians are guardians of evidence, information warriors, champions of the truth, purveyors of knowledge, would bolster trust in our profession – we, the library professionals, are our best promotion.
As a Board Representative, you represent the LIS sector as a whole. How will you ensure that all voices are heard (eg. health, law, schools, public)?
Diversity is one of ALIA’s strengths - the fact that libraries cross many sectors, types of organisations, and levels of government, is a huge asset that we should use to our advantage. I don’t believe ALIA is capitalising on this incredible reach into all sectors of society.
From a strategic planning perspective, the modus operandi I would be suggesting would be to conduct broad, multi-sector consultations on all major strategic issues, e.g. creating a Diversity Strategy; strengthening accreditation of LIS schools/courses using a Quality Improvement framework; implementing a structured system of CPD. (I can elaborate more on any of these issues.)
The Professional Pathways Project was an interesting example of how ALIA can engage with all sectors in a broad and representative consultative process. The LIS Workforce Framework is the main outcome to date, and it is the basis for more work. I think it has benefited from having cross-sectoral input.
I believe there is a role for a “chief insights” officer within ALIA to analyse the data which is already collected from the various sectors, and to design reporting parameters where these are lacking e.g. workforce and employment data, industrial awards. This could be packaged to add value for institutional members and organisational partners. As a Board member I would be looking at opportunities to engage with such a role.
Many of you have expressed support for the recognition of people with disability, including advocating for inclusion and representation in our sector. Could you provide an example/s as to how this might look in action for you?
I have a couple of suggestions on this topic.
- Workforce diversity needs affirmative action. This starts with accreditation of LIS schools, which can include a diversity metric to encourage enrolment right from the start; ways for ALIA to support students with a disability at the Work Integrated Learning (WIL) or internship stage to help to get their first “foot in the door” and gain experience that is often difficult to get prior to landing a first job, could be looked into.
- Regarding the delivery of library services to people with disability: some research has already been enabled by ALIA’s Twila Herr research grant. The first step would be to find out what topics have already been looked at, check the evidence that currently exists, and assess what’s practically implementable, and design projects to support libraries especially to address the needs via digital service delivery models.