I was struck by news this morning that police have taken action against an internet forum called DarkMarkets, used for swapping information about stolen credit cards and website accounts. It sounds like Nature Network for criminals – it would be fascinating to observe the style of interaction on such a site. Just to balance things up I also read this morning about GPEN – the Global Prosecutors E-Crime Network. Its purpose is international cooperation against e-crime.
It just goes to show that the web is neither inherently good nor inherently bad but reflects the whole range of human activity. This is an argument that we have to make over and over again it seems. Fifteen years ago when the internet was new, those of us evangelising about it often had to reassure people that there was useful information online, and they shouldn’t believe scare stories. This message took a long time to reach some quarters, such as NHS IT managers who apparently felt the Internet was evil and should not be allowed into their hospitals.
Today things have moved on and internet access is commonplace. The front line has moved on to social networking sites, Second Life etc. I know that a number of my colleagues in the NHS, professional bodies and even some research institutes are barred by their local IT policies from accessing dangerous sites such as Yahoogroups, Facebook and even blogs. There are groups looking at Second Life in the NHS but access is blocked for the majority in the NHS.
Librarians have for long championed the cause of unrestricted access to information. It can be a hard message to get across sometimes.
-
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- Frank Norman on My lovely sister, 1946-2025
- Mary Crickard on My lovely sister, 1946-2025
- Frank Norman on My lovely sister, 1946-2025
- Patti Biggs on My lovely sister, 1946-2025
- Frank Norman on My lovely sister, 1946-2025
Archives
- April 2025
- March 2025
- December 2024
- November 2024
- September 2024
- May 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- April 2023
- April 2022
- January 2022
- September 2021
- June 2021
- February 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- December 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- June 2016
- March 2016
- April 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
Categories
- AI
- Archives
- Art
- Authorship
- Bibliographic management
- Bibliometrics etc
- Biographical
- Blogology
- Books
- Collections
- Communicating science
- Copyright and IP
- Crick
- Document delivery
- E-books
- Education
- Ethics
- Family
- Film
- Film and music
- Friends
- Froth
- Future of Libraries
- History
- Information skills
- Journal publishing
- Language
- Libraries and librarians
- Management
- Mentoring
- Metadata
- Music
- Open Access
- Open Science
- Peer review
- Preprints
- Reading recommendations
- Research Councils
- Research data
- Research management
- Research tools
- Scientific literature
- Searching
- Social networking
- Uncategorized
- Wikipedia
- Women
- Writing
Blogroll
Meta
Just seen a comment from the Internet Librarian International conference to say that Australia government librarians are not allowed to be on Facebook.
Wibble?
If you are interested in questions like this, you might like the book “Who controls the internet?” by Goldsmith and Wu. I recently wrote a review about it, see here.
Interesting. I’m delighted that the powers that be at Diabetes UK are quite forward thinking on this then as we’ve used Facebook and Second Life to promote awareness. Recently I posted some information about the Diabetes Research Network (DRN) and the work they do in helping people with diabetes to find out more about getting involved with research trials – apparently this post doubled their monthly enquiries. Another colleague has been able to find people who are keen to be ‘case studies’ for media reports on diabetes and our current campaign (Silent Assassin) has been launched in Second Life. Beyond me why anyone would want to deny themselves the opportunity to speak with people where the people actually are 😉
Diabetes UK facebook page
Silent Assassin on Second Life
I frequently wish they’d ban Facebook at work! It is banned at my children’s school, my stepdaughter’s work (a major City firm) and various friends and relations’ work. Not because it is dangerous, but because of the time-wasting that goes on. My point is, fine to use these sites for bone-fide work related matters, but a lot of people abuse it: this is one (not the only) reason why employers get nervous about their employees blogging, social networking, shopping and so on.
But seriously, it is a perennial question – the Internet is a medium not a message, but it is a very powerful medium as we read all the time, today about terrorist groups using child pornography networks for example – you could not make it up. One issue in that particular story (and a regular problem I am sure) is that the police don’t have the technology or the knowledge to keep up with it all.
I agree with you of course that knowledge should be uncensored. But one can get a bit sad about what some people choose to do with the wonderful opportunities offered by the Internet.
Maxine, isn’t it possible to waste just as much time writing e-mails (ok, when e-mail was still ‘new’..)? Or yakking in the corridor? And if you do waste all your time, won’t your employer notice, because you’re much less productive – and you would avoid doing it for that reason?
So what exactly is the benefit of actually banning sites like facebook at work?
..and what about NN?
Yes you are right, Steffi. I guess employers see social sites as “yet one more thing”…
Well, everything I have heard said about social sites etc echoes what I remember being said about email and the web 10 to 15 years ago. I’m sure they said the same about TVs, about telephones, about radio, and about printed books when all those things were new.
History is a wonderful thing, especially when you live through it.
Imagine long, dark, cold winter nights sitting around in a hut – without internet connection!!
Hang on, that actually doesn’t sound too bad – if it’s only for a few days.
I feel a bit like you, Frank, having lived through a lot of these things myself too. (Though I don’t remember the invention of the telephone ;-).) And I don’t think information should be censored. However, I do think over the years all these inventions have made it successively easier to waste time at work without being noticed. It is something to do with fluctuating concentration levels, possibly.
As it happens I can’t use Second Life either because of IT rules. (I could walk to offices elsewhere in the building and find a computer with access.) This happens quite a lot, eg I once set up to join a “Webinar” (horrid word) but when it started I could not join in because of the IT block. By the time it was sorted, the “Webinar” was finished.