Looking Back, Looking Forward, and Transformation in Information Ethics

Abstract

This issue represents a unique perspective in information ethics at this moment in time. There is a change occurring; indeed, a transition has been under way for some time, from those who set the path, those who defined this field, to a newly minted body of scholars who see the context for the parameters of information ethics in a vastly different way. We, this field of information ethics, still grapple with the same fundamental definitions of information ethics as were presented in the 1980s, the "inception" of this discipline. We still think about issues of creation, access, control, and dissemination of information. Yet, what constitutes the definition of "information" and what constitutes those activities around information is dramatically different. James Moor was one of the first to call attention to the different nature of "computer" data, describing it as greased and malleable; he called attention to the "policy vacuums" and "conceptual muddles" created by digital data. Those characteristics articulated in the 1980s have indeed proven true, and even Moor may be surprised at the extent to which those very characteristics have transformed not only research and scholarship but individuals and societies themselves. We have seen such arguments for "everything is miscellaneous," and "the world is flat"-those are indicative of the collapsing parameters resultant from the ways in which we create, use, and disseminate information in this moment. This forces us to a broader question.Where is the discipline of information ethics? It is increasingly diffused. It is, simultaneously more important and less important than ever. It is ever important because every discipline essentially grapples now with information ethics issues, and because of that, its "significance" as a "stand- alone discipline" is called into question. Scholars from across an array of disciplines are engaging more directly with issues of data integrity, ethical research practices, privacy, autonomy, identity, trust, reality, data sharing, data manipulation, fragmentation, orientation. Information ethicists have made these issues explicit over the years, but increasingly, disciplinary specificity is collapsing and these issues certainly do not reside in any one clear domain. This is happening because of the nature of digital data which is causing every scholar, researcher, bureaucrat, and individual to think differently about their relationship with the world, in both physical and virtual realms. Information ethics scholarship is changing, pushing boundaries in its scope and reach. A physicist, Vlatko Vedra, recently described the theory of quantum information, that everything, the universe itself, is information. Information is superior. If we follow his lead, everything, then, is information ethics? With that, one might also argue that nothing is information ethics, a stance I do not support.Information ethics has co- existed along with other "ethics" for many years: computer ethics, business ethics, bioethics. Each of these has a corresponding "disciplinary home." Information ethics has had a rocky home in library and information studies, and it is notable to consider Enright's perspectives on this. It is also notable to consider the numbers of LIS programs that still have no ethics course; there is an implicit assumption that because of accreditation standards, ethics will be interwoven across the curriculum, an assumption I question. Ethics is often seen as an afterthought in professional programs, accreditation standards notwithstanding. Other disciplines, for example, those in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM), debate heartily what mode is best for ethics education-stand alone courses or infusion models. I have not seen the same curricular debates in LIS. More commonly, LIS ethics are introduced through the standard codes of ethics. Professional ethics are symbolically embodied in codes-codes of ethics, as Zaiane, presents, are universal guiding documents, but do not ensure ethical behavior or professionalism. …