Shoemaker. EKO3 2015 1 No One Can Whistle a Symphony

Shoemaker. EKO3 2015
1
No One Can Whistle a Symphony: Seeking a Catalogers’ Code of Ethics
Beth Shoemaker, Cataloging/Resource Access Librarian, St. Ambrose University
[email protected]
Abstract:
The ethics of information organization takes up relatively little print space in technical service
and cataloging journals, despite catalogers’ role in the most fundamental level of making
resources available – or unavailable - to patrons. Existing codes of ethics for library staff offer
only peripheral guidelines, leaving catalogers adrift when ethical issues arise. Ultimately the lack
of a clear code of ethics for information organization reinforces existing mystification around the
role of catalogers within the library and causes difficulty in justifying decisions to supervisors
and administrators.
As librarians, our overriding guidance comes from the ALA Code of Ethicsi. Only articles II and
VII of that code have direct bearing on metadata and cataloging work. These articles, II: resisting
censorship and VII: separating personal convictions from professional duties, are vague and
require unpacking in order to see their application to information organization. While this code is
necessarily trying to be all things to all people, the sparse direction for metadata professionals
leaves much to be desired. Other official publications from ALA such as the ALCTS Supplement
and the Library Bill of Rights are equally vague regarding information organization.
While not technically a code of ethics, the ALA statement on Labeling and Rating Systemsii
does begin to touch specifically on cataloging and metadata. Dealing explicitly with how
libraries should not prejudice access to resources through labeling, catalogers are compelled to
consider the role of subject headings, authority work and RDA relationships as potential ways to
restrict or encourage access to resources. The statement on Labeling and Rating is the only
current publication of the ALA or its sections that provides clear direction relevant to cataloging
and metadata work.
Outside the professional bulwark of ALA, at least two individuals have made attempts at crafting
statements or codes of ethics. The first is the venerable Sanford Berman, whose brief statement
in The Unabashed Librarianiii flies in the face of portions of the ALA Code of Ethics. While it is
Shoemaker. EKO3 2015
2
tempting to raise our fists in solidarity with his bold statement, it is problematic both for its
contradiction to the ALA Code, and also because it is inflammatory and in no way actionable.
Sheila Bair has proposed a very specific 10 point Cataloging Code of Ethicsiv which contains
much to recommend it, including positioning cataloging as a public service of the library. She
has clearly put a great deal of thought into crafting her code, and the results are impressive and
useful. However, while no code of ethics can cover every situation, there are points where we see
frequent contradictions in practice, such as providing “accurate, full-level records to the shared
databases” (Bair, 2005, 23) versus the actual content of tools like OCLC. Additionally Bair’s
code could be seen to reinforce dichotomies of the academic workplace between MLS-trained
librarians/faculty and staff members. A meaningful starting point, Bair’s code lacks one
additional important aspect: professional endorsement.
Codes of ethics are necessarily idealistic – they describe how one should act. The beauty and
danger of professional codes of ethics is that they are not compulsory and cannot be enforced.
Nevertheless, a professional code of ethics for information organization fulfills several important
roles. A code that is accepted by a profession points to consensus within a group about what
constitutes ethical behavior, and thereby places everyone at the same starting point. A specific
code, composed and accepted by a professional organization serves to clarify the role of that
profession, and lend it credence in the willingness of its members to act according to a standard.
Lastly it is a tool that can be used to guide and justify decisions and set policy within cataloging
and metadata departments that may have broad implications for the entire library.
In this paper I discuss the limited literature about ethics of information organization to elucidate
the kind of situations we face with minimal ethical guidance and the questions they raise for our
profession. After careful consideration of both the positive and negative aspects of codifying
ethical standards, I clarify what metadata professionals lose as a group and as individuals by not
having a code. I therefore challenge the membership of the Cataloging and Metadata
Management Section (CaMMS) to address this void and begin drafting a Code of Ethics for
Information Organization.
References:
Shoemaker. EKO3 2015
3
Code of Ethics of the American Library Association. Accessed February 11, 2015.
http://www.ala.org/advocacy/proethics/codeofethics/codeethics
Labeling and Rating Systems: an interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights. Accessed February
8, 2015. http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/interpretations/labelingrating
Berman, Sanford. “Berman’s Bag: Why Catalog?” The Unabashed Librarian 116 (2000):1
Bair, Sheila. “Toward a Code of Ethics for Cataloging”. Technical Services Quarterly 23 no.1
(2005): 23. DOI: 10.1300/J124v23n01_02