MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2514596130

Democratic Communication and the Library as Workplace

2003· article· en· W2514596130 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Stephen Michael Carney

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Information Ethics · 2003
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueLaw, Rights, and Freedoms
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDemocracyCensorshipIntellectual freedomPoliticsIntellectual propertyHuman rightsSociologyCivil libertiesLawSustenanceCivil societyPolitical scienceLaw and economics
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

When rights are added to civil and political rights we start to move from treating human beings as things to be bought and sold, to a consideration of their essential humanity and its sustenance and development. The individual's isolation in the market is replaced by a concern to maintain the means for the development of his or her individuality as a human being. Thus, rights of when added to civil liberties and political democracy may present a major challenge to free market capitalism.-Fred TwineIntroductionA guarantee that the individual and the public as a whole have access to as wide and as diverse a selection of knowledge as that which exists, free of charge and ideally without restriction, represents for many the greatest and most essential rights of in western liberal society. For this reason, a dedicated commitment to the principles of intellectual freedom and freedom of expression, along side a resistance to censorship in any form, are often recognized as among the major driving forces behind the modern library discourse. One needs simply to turn to the professional statements of various North American library associations to see how the library and the librarian are conceptualized as the guarantor's of intellectual freedom or a ...state of a∂airs in which each human being has the freedom to think, say, write, and promulgate any idea or belief (Gorman 88). For instance, the Canadian Library Association's Statement on Intellectual Freedom reads in part:Libraries have a basic responsibility for the development and maintenance of intellectual freedom. It is the responsibility of libraries to guarantee and facilitate access to all expressions of knowledge and intellectual activity, including those which some elements of society may consider to be unconventional, unpopular or unacceptable. To this end, libraries shall acquire and make available the widest variety of materials.Despite the importance and significance of the principles represented in this statement, the scholarly and professional library literatures o∂er no or very few indications of the library employee's right to freely express her or his opinion in the library workplace. The public library as a place of work, as most other workplaces in a liberal market economy, is typically based upon a hierarchical organizational structure (Buschman and Rosenzweig 37). Such organizational structures are inherently adverse to the protection of intellectual freedom, since they are based upon the authority and visibility of certain voices over others in the communicative process. Allowing certain voices a privileged position or dominant role in the communication of knowledge represents a crisis of legitimacy for intellectual freedom and for democracy in general. The North American library community is a particularly relevant profession to consider when studying the question of intellectual freedom within the workplace, since it is a profession that regards the defense of intellectual freedom as among its core values.It is important to recognize that the debate surrounding intellectual freedom and freedom of expression in western liberal society is generally framed from within a liberal democratic rights based perspective. In this context, freedom of expression represents a legally and constitutionally protected right for the individual to express an opinion. Although it is not within the scope of this paper to provide an overall critique of the liberal democratic perspective, it can be demonstrated that the protection of intellectual freedom as a 'civil liberty will benefit when it exists along side a dedication to the social rights of citizenship (i.e., a guaranteed and reasonable minimum wage, guaranteed housing, and so on). Conceptualizing intellectual freedom in this manner should help the discussion in two ways. First of all, it will help in developing an understanding of why it is important for library employees, who in many ways must act as advocates for intellectual freedom, to have a guaranteed protection to their own freedom of expression in the workplace. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,009
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCommunication savante
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: Théorique ou conceptuel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,961
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,084

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0090,012
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0030,004
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0180,034
Communication savante0,0390,019
Science ouverte0,0010,019
Intégrité de la recherche0,0080,007
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0250,008

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,021
Tête enseignante GPT0,294
Écart entre enseignants0,273 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations5
Publié2003
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Information EthicsMême sujetLaw, Rights, and FreedomsTravaux en français237 207