Guest post by Mike Conroy of the SLAIS LIBR 561 Information Policy class

In his closing plenary, Dr. Trosow discussed the importance of creating what he called a ‘holistic critical’ model of information policy.  He explained that information policy issues tend to be dealt with in distinct categories and that such an approach tends not to recognize that a single policy issue can have substantial implications in other policy areas.  What’s needed instead is a unified lens from which to look at issues.  To explain his model, Dr. Trosow used the example of paracopyright , a term he uses for ant-circumvention measures such as digital locks.  Such an issue has implications for privacy and censorship and other issues.  In other words information policy issues are“mutually co-determinative”.

Holistic

Information policy occurs in many venues.  While policy making is often thought of as being conducted at the federal and international levels, it in fact can occur at all levels including down to the institutional level where library policy is made.  These levels of policy making are crucial and are areas where everyone has the ability to influence policy, raise questions, and speak out when library boards, management or departments are making policy decisions.

By recognizing the interrelationship between policy issues, interest groups can reach a greater understanding with advocates in other policy areas.   Furthermore, there is no finite list of information policy issues.  Dr. Trosow, suggests a list of policy issues, “such as” copyright etc, to emphasize the point.  He also suggested that the war in Iraq could be considered a library issue because it affects the ability of governments to provide services in the United States, and mentioned an ALA resolution in opposition to the war.  He also urged the audience not to shy away from the legal side of policy issues, suggesting that information professionals are just as qualified to comment on policy as lawyers.

Critical

The critical aspect to Dr. Trosow’s model involves the adoption of a critical theory approach to information policy.  It involves looking at the qualitative aspects of information, viewing information as a social construction, and recognizing that technology is embedded in our social relations while rejecting technological determinism.  Dr. Trosow also looks to political economy to argue that information is a public good and should therefore be considered over market forces.

Barriers to the adoption of a critical holistic model

Dr. Trosow suggests that the major barrier to the adoption of a critical holistic approach to information policy is perception.  He highlights the narrow thinking of institutional or organizational mandates: “It’s not a library issue”.  Because of the narrow thinking on policy issues, only a narrow range of solutions are ever sought out.  Libraries enter into complex licensing agreements to avoid ‘messy’ fair use issues.  And the dilemma of compensating artists and creators is addressed through copyright-centric proposals to the exclusion of other ideas.  Dr. Trosow notes that there could be plenty of other ways to fund the arts besides imposing greater copyright restrictions.  For example, academics get paid up front for their work or are paid in tenure, which is why they have less issues with copyright.

By broadening our scope to the scale of the holistic - critical framework, we may be able to find new and innovative ways of addressing information policy issues that take into account the complexity of implications and outcomes of policy decisions.