Artificial intelligence

AI and decision making

Ella Breed, Advaith Deo, Logan Xu, Xiao Wu, Grayson Yount

This panel reveals how algorithms are used to filter out candidates during the recruitment phase of hiring and how algorithmic bias affects equity in the hiring process. Our panel will raise ethical questions about the responsibilities of employers to ensure fairness and transparency through the use of a resume experiment and a persona. At the end of the presentation we examine what can be done, what should be done, and provide recommendations for the future of AI hiring to reduce systemic bias and increase equity.

AI Biases and Assistive Technologies

Members: Alex Gao, Yue Liang, Nicole Lu, Zijie Zhao, and Zhongle Zhou

The topic will be biases that emerge in AI and machine learning technologies due to biased training datasets. Within it, care and assistive technologies for disability populations will be the focus. With the recent rise of ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence applications in society, the number of people affected by such technologies will only increase. Bias towards certain populations within these fast result-generating algorithms has been identified and improved, however, discrimination towards many others remains an issue. We wish to increase awareness of the disadvantages people with disabilities encounter as many of their rights and needs are, to this day, seldom addressed by society. There are four areas we wish to address in our upcoming presentation. One is to introduce our audiences to the biases in machine learning designs toward people with disabilities, and why and how they occur. Two is showing real-life challenges people with disabilities face amidst the expansion of AI application options in different areas of society. Three will be highlighting insights researchers gained from their studies regarding AI and disabled populations. Four will focus on the current and prospect of solutions for biases in AI. As information professionals soon to enter the workforce in technology or closely related fields, it is our duty to facilitate designs in technologies that are inclusive to all users. Only when fairness and accessibility for all are considered, will we be able to achieve the common goal of technology inventions, which is to make lives better for humans?

AI for Social Good

Bailey Roberts, Adriana Quijano, Matthew Christian, Samantha Titus, Anirudh Patil

Artificial intelligence has been encroaching on many facets of socioeconomic spaces once tasked to people to perform, analyze, tweak, correct, or pursue for many years. Initially, this technology was seen by many as groundbreaking, unbelievable breakthroughs in futuristic thinking. Fewer recognized that artificial intelligence posed threats to jobs, free thinking and choosing, and was a step forward that one could not reverse. As technology increases its presence in our everyday lives, it is becoming increasingly important for us to consider the concerns these systems pose for human privacy and safety, our freedom to choose, who controls artificial intelligence systems, and how different groups of people may be unfairly affected by these changes. Further, we must employ our brightest minds not only to create technology, but to give it bounds, restrict it for the good of the people, and create a more vibrant, thriving social life for people around the world.

In this panel, we will consider AI as it relates to surveillance capitalism, art generation, privacy, inequality, and artificial culture. Surveillance capitalism not only changes the choices we make and the things we see, but it changes the way we view technology, law enforcement, advertisements, and companies we previously may have idolized. Image generation technologies not only take away from the skills of human artists, but they also remove the compensation from these artists. As artificial intelligence systems begin to know more about us than we do about ourselves, we begin to question how much these systems should be able to see about us. Further, we question what it means to really have privacy in a world filled with listening technologies. As these technologies listen to us, we must ask who is listening? How do their intentions impact us? And what if our vision of the information planet does not align with the people who are listening? Finally, we must ask ourselves how artificial intelligence and the new wave of information technologies are changing, intentionally or otherwise, our social circles, our human connectivity, and our nature.

Podcast on Racial Bias In AI

Chelsea Lancaster, Alona Norwood, Denise Stroud

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is everywhere. From Alexa to Chat GPT to AI Art generating programs it is slowly becoming engrained into our daily lives. We have begun allowing these systems to persuade our decisions and even make them on our behalf. This innovative technology does not come without risks and some of the risks that have already affected society, especially marginalized communities. AI algorithms can perpetuate human biases and there is often a lack of transparency in their decision-making. When the algorithm is trained on data that inherits bias or does not include under-represented population characteristics, existing prejudices can be reinforced (Tugba). For our panel discussion, we are looking at the root cause of this issue, if it can be solved, and what are ways we can moderate AI to limit prejudice.

Our discussion serves a few purposes. The first purpose is to announce the issue and create awareness. Many people have no idea that others are experiencing artificial intelligence in a way that is not consistent with the way in which they do. Our next purpose is to show evidence of the issue. We do this by showing videos of the issue happening in real time and through a Snapchat filter activity that highlights the difference between minority and white experiences when using the application. The final purpose is to philosophize on what can be done to solve the problem.

Will diversifying the field of developers help? Should we stop using AI altogether? Do we need to place legal limits on what decisions our society allows AI to make?

While we may not be able to come to a solid conclusion in our symposium panel, we can at least get the audience to be thinking about racial bias in AI, and even better, promote them to see it in their daily lives and look for solutions.

Information access

“What You Don’t Know May In Fact Hurt You” – Increasing Access to Health Information

Elizabeth Byrd, Mrudula Chavali, Denise Mantey, Mariam Tariq, River Zorich

There exists a severe lack of healthcare literacy within the United States, that is exacerbated when referencing Persons of Color, those of lower socioeconomic status, and other marginalized communities. This lack of healthcare literacy has resulted in a multitude of struggles for not only people, but the hospital systems as well. It is expected that poor healthcare literacy has led to an estimated 238 billion dollars in cost to the healthcare system. The reasons behind this are varied, but individuals who are older, foreign-born, living with chronic conditions, and those living under the poverty line are highly likely to experience low healthcare literacy. The United States may particularly be affected by low healthcare literacy rates due to a long history of exclusion from healthcare due to cost and insurance requirements. To improve healthcare literacy, there are many different methods that could be used, but follow a core idea of improving access to healthcare information, whether that of the patient or from reputable public sources. Increasing access to one’s own health records, the incorporation of public institutions like the library system, increasing clinician and provider involvement in disseminating healthcare information, and the creation of advanced technologies to streamline access to healthcare information are proposed methods to improve access to healthcare information, and hopefully increase healthcare literacy overall. By shedding light on this problem, our goal is to provide evidence-based solutions that could reduce resource and financial burden on an already stressed healthcare system, but more importantly aim to provide individuals power over their own health, and overall ensure the best chance at healthy individuals.

This panel will include Mariam Tariq who will discuss overcoming barriers to access of healthcare information, Denise Mantey who will speak on the role of public libraries in the effort of spreading healthcare information, River Zorich discussing disability and health information literacies amongst librarians, Mrudula Chavali speaking on the usage of blockchain in managing health records and access of health records, and Elizabeth Byrd speaking on the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in disseminating health information.

Shadow Librarians and Dungeon Masters: Exploring Ethical Questions Around the Democratization of Information

Megan Cross, Carrie Dean, Sammie Killmer, James Onorevole, Sam Winemiller

Various parties strive to make data/information globally accessible despite restrictions (and in some cases in response to them). Conversely, corporations attempt to commercialize and restrict access to public, communally-produced data through defense of intellectual property and copyright. In these conflicts, many ethical questions remain around ownership over publicly- or communally-produced information, who bears responsibility for its upkeep, and the actors involved in regulating large-scale data sharing networks. We explore some of these questions through two case studies: the free provision of proprietary information via shadow libraries, and Hasbro’s attempts to monetize community-created stories and content related to Dungeons & Dragons

View slides

How Information Institutions Can More Equitably Serve Disabled Populations

Jeremiah Hartsock, Marina Klimova, Wylie Thornquist, Sirius (HuiLong) Wang, Grace (Luxin) Zhang

In our presentation we will be exploring academic theories related to the topic of disability, and addressing concrete ways in which information and library professionals can more equitably serve people with disabilities. Advocacy on behalf of patrons with disabilities has been taken up as a cause among information and library professionals for decades, but many library spaces and practices continually fail to adequately meet the principles of universal design and accessibility. We will be approaching the topic of disability from a social justice framing, analyzing the disparities created by an ableist society that present roadblocks for disabled patrons in meeting their information needs. We will argue that universal design has profound benefits for a wide variety of patrons, not solely those traditionally understood to be “disabled” in our society. Key insights from the field of disability studies reframe advocacy on behalf of those with disabilities to reveal the ways in which all information users can benefit from more accessible technologies and services. Improving and expanding access for disabled people is more than solving a “problem” or checking off a box for ADA compliance – rather, it is the pursuit of greater inclusion of underrepresented people, and the ethical imperative to provide people with the resources they need in appropriate ways. We will examine the current technologies and services available, and the systemic barriers to access that permeate the infrastructures that provide said services. We will talk about a variety of interrelated topics, from perceptions of disability in the design of accessibility tools, to efforts made in Special Collections Libraries to more equitably serve visually impaired populations. Our presentation will also explore how technologies such as natural language processing (NLP) have been used to advance accessibility, and how the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the availability and limitations of current accessibility technologies. Finally we will be presenting on the costs associated with building and maintaining inclusive infrastructure. We will welcome open discussion by framing the topics of interest and asking for participant interaction to provide thoughts, insight, and personal experiences in both verbal and written form.

Data accessibility: issues and implications

Abigail Coupe, Lauren Deunas, Amarachi Onyekachi, Kellie Woolever, and Wenyi You

Data accessibility refers to the ease in which individuals, organizations and systems can access and use data in a timely and effective manner. It allows people and organizations to retrieve and analyze relevant data and to make data-driven decisions, allowing them to keep up with competitors. A variety of factors can influence data accessibility, such as the format in which the data is stored, how well the data is protected and the availability of tools and software to retrieve and analyze the data. Since the era of digitalization, there have been questions regarding the access to data and information and their uses. Issues of privacy and public knowledge, national security and government oversight, data and information accuracy, academic freedom and indoctrination have been exacerbated in the twentieth (20th) and twenty first (21st) centuries thanks to communication developments in the Industrial Revolution and, most recently, with public access to the internet in the 1980s. Policymakers have the monolithic task of striking a balance between these questions and, ironically, their access to and interpretation of information dictates the legislation surrounding it. But it does not stop there. The access to and the use of information further determines foreign policy, budget spending, and environmental actions.

Surveillance, privacy & misinformation

Digital Literacy: Privacy, Policies, and User Empowerment

Genna Crites, Harrison Camp, Yi-Chieh Huang, Raef Salem, and Sheri Thomas

The digital world is expanding at exponential rates, with that our digital footprint accumulates as well. Almost any type of technology now can collect information on its users, by design or otherwise. Are you aware of what information has been collected about you? Do you know how to access information on your digital footprint? Have you read the terms and conditions of the technologies you use? With the growing dependence on digital technology for our society, it is imperative that we are aware of our personal information digital literacy. Many express concerns over their personal privacy rights, all the while not taking the steps to protect those rights. Through data literacy, we are better prepared to make informed decisions when using online digital platforms. When interacting with social media platforms and the like, our personal information data may be recorded. These platforms have data collection and removal practices we should be aware of and use to our advantage. Knowledge of your legislative rights nationwide and within your home state will empower you in your data practices. While legislation does address the issue of personal information data collection, there are still gaps the law does not cover and ethical dilemmas to consider. Understanding the language around the terms and conditions of the digital platforms you use will clarify when you are giving consent and to what extent. The devil is in the details; terms and conditions can hide in plain sight their data collection practices. You should know what data is being collected on you and who it is being shared with. Becoming data literate will give you the power to take charge of your personal information data and protect your rights. Through our symposium presentation, we hope to guide conversations in this topic. The discussion will center around the basics of digital literacy and the ethical questions currently being brought to debate.

Health (Mis)Information: Ethics, Outcomes, and Consequences

Emily Zimmermann, Nadia Merrit, Ellen Perleberg, Mohan Ram Rajendran., Alex Martin, and Destry Adams

In today’s atmosphere of rapid information exchange, ethical implications of health (mis)information not only in medical settings but also on social media, mainstream news, and in the grocery store must be interrogated. Given the vested interest individuals have in the transmission of health knowledge, varying levels of health literacy, and abilities to identify misinformation can deeply impact individuals as well as societal health and well-being. This presentation will focus on (mis)information surrounding food sciences, farming practices, and how the creation of online health communities can inform but also stigmatize certain health conditions and marginalized communities.

It’s for Your Safety, or is It? The Ethical Dilemma of Using Biometric Data

Logan Hill, Victoria Neff, Rachel Priesman Màrquez, and Brian Quast,

The presentation will investigate the ethical implications involved in the collection and use of biometrical data in various contexts. With the surge of technology, there is an influx of transitioning into using biometrics as a form of identification and data retention. This surge has created a hefty supply of controversies and issues centered around the use of biometrics, some of which our group will be discussing throughout our presentation. Specifically, we will examine controversies of biometrics in educational settings, familial DNA as evidence in criminal court cases, facial recognition and the Uighur genocide, and biometric surveillance in the workplace. These are all serious issues that the information world is facing and will continue to face as technology advances further.

Surveillance and the Making of the ‘Productive Citizen’

Harry Hoy, Mikaela Murphy, Oliver Sherren, Avianna Wooten

Beginning with a brief historical overview of the design and uneven implementation of surveillance as a tool to enforce normative standards of productivity across marginalized groups, this panel examines the construction of the “productive citizen.” Productive citizenship is a term used within disability studies to critique the narrow ways that we assign value to a person based on their ability to engage in “productive” activities, including paid and unpaid work. Under capitalist regimes, productivity is not just a moralized ideal, but is a condition upon which entry into social and political life is determined. Working through the narrative device of a persona, we aim to demonstrate how the deployment of surveillance practices across social welfare programs, libraries, and workplaces uphold and reinforce the requirements of productive citizenship while punishing those who fail to meet those requirements. We close by considering the possibility of new forms of social and political life that are antagonistic to the ideological underpinnings of surveillance practices.

Public & school libraries

Censorship in School Libraries

Sarah Doyon, Abbie Mann-Wood, Emily Michaels, Lauren Crowe, and Joy Pasin

In 2021 there were over 700 book challenges in libraries across the United States. As legislators began targeting what content can be covered in schools these numbers increased exponentially; between July 2021 and June 2022 there were over 2500 books challenged in schools. 41% of these books had queer content and 40% had protagonists of color. This is a problem that school librarians are facing regularly and often without support from their school administration. These challenges, often led by conservative parents and community groups or conservative legislators, illuminate the unique avenues by which censorship can take hold in American schools.

Current controversies in collection development for youth services

Julia Amodeo, Jade Gregory, Brianna Macgruder, Simon Williams, Taelor Wright

Demands for censorship in libraries are nothing new. Libraries can do more to combat this outcry by creating and adhering to strong collection development policies that put an emphasis on a diversity of ideas and representation of marginalized groups. Libraries are one of the primary resources for children to access literature, and as such, strong collection development policies in youth services are critical for ensuring that children learn to accept themselves and others in a diversifying world. We will discuss a recent controversy in which the Wake County Library System added a transphobic book to its collection and frameworks for preventing similar situations in the future.

Libraries and archives as “third place”

Patrick Evans, Sana Jeong, Katelynn Laws, Jenna Lloyd, Jillian MacKinnon

In the twenty-first century, “third places,” or places where people can enjoy leisure, work, etc. without the pressure of purchasing a product, are few and far between. In considering this reality, we argue the importance of libraries and archives as a “third place.” As information professionals, we often view our role in society as providers of knowledge, but sometimes communities simply desire spaces to convene without external pressure to spend, especially during periods of economic downturn. While the idea of libraries and archives as spaces in addition to information centers may set off alarms for some information professionals, it is an important consideration that may reframe the way we perceive our roles in a healthy society. During our panel, we will consider questions regarding the impact of information spaces as place on the relationship between information professionals and users while analyzing case studies where libraries and archives have been successful in implementng the “third place.”

Policy and Punishment in the Public Library

Elizabeth Findley, Fiona Lynch, Taylor Brannan, Julia Greene, Isabella Luongo

How do policies in public libraries affect patrons’ sense of belonging? This interactive workshop will investigate and challenge policies in public libraries, drawing on the lived experiences of participants and research on library culture and rules. Together, we will explore topics such as privacy, book challenges, accessibility, policing, and the ways they enforce larger systems of power while prioritizing the comfort of certain populations over others.

Policy & power

The Impact of Policies on Information Environments

Hannah Whitaker, Emma Mitchum, Sean Amiel, Sarah Dwyer

Our panel seeks to interrogate the role of policies in both libraries and the healthcare system, both at a general institutional level, as well as on the individual and community level. In both these environments, we are exploring how these policies impact facets of access, inclusion, security, equity, and power distribution. In instances of tension and struggle, we also seek to explore how information professionals are currently working within these landscapes in which policies and information spaces intersect, both in manners of advocacy and upholding, as well as in manners of resistance.

Throughout our session, we will converse around and explore four facets of the implications policies produce on information systems—positioning “policies” as a tool of advocacy, a point of diversion, a means to oppress, and a means to ensure security. Specifically, we will highlight instances in which library policies negatively affect, and in many instances, target specific user groups in discriminatory practices. Furthermore, we will analyze how politics-informed and politics-responsive policies are becoming more prevalently codified in information environments.

The third angle we are exploring is the ways in which library policies can operate as a tool in protection of intellectual freedom, and as a method to fight against censorship. Lastly, we will explore the nuance brought forward in information security policies within the healthcare industry.

In outlining these issues we hope to present space to process and understand the ways in which policies impact information environments, with specific consideration as to who is involved in their creation and enforcement. By understanding and interrogating the role policies play, and how we as communities interact with them, we can strengthen the abilities of our institutions to uphold missions, values, and the ways in which we are able to serve our communities. By initiating these conversations and this thinking, we can also work towards solutions where necessary, and revisions to practices where needed.

Examining Power Dynamics: Cataloging, Digital Archiving, Public Libraries, & Health Sciences

Alaina Economus, Miro DeLuca, Sophia Hutchens, and Erin Simon

Our panel seeks to examine power dynamics within the library and information science (LIS) field. We will focus on four LIS subfields and provide examples of their specific power imbalances, including the influence of digital recordkeeping on the relationship between social media companies and government forces; the dominant frameworks and practices present in metadata creation and cataloging language standards; the perpetuation of carceral care and the control of knowledge production within public libraries; and the dynamics of users and creators in regards to recordkeeping and electronic records.

Our panel will attempt to identify specific issues that arise in regards to power dynamics in library and information science, and discuss and propose solutions to these issues.

Metadata on the Margins

Runqi Hou, Valentin Skald, Matthew Thieroff, Teagan Watkins, Lei Zhang

The Information and Library Science field contains many interlocking parts which impact everything from people to technology to social development to cultural memory. A major area we feel should be a central focus is how marginalized groups interact with and are impacted by the technological advancements, technological access, and material access that our field provides. Each of us covers a different area of study. We will unpack how rhetoric and description impacts how members of the LGBTQ+ community see themselves, access information, and relate to LGBTQ+ archival materials. We will analyze how algorithms and metadata change how marginalized groups search for information and gain access to said information. We will look at how marginalized groups interact with and have access to information systems such as libraries and technology and discuss how that impacts their educational opportunities. In order to present these complex problems and assess their implications, we will discuss prior research and draw connections between previous studies. We will compare past literature and form observations that might not have been made known to the field yet. We have found that there is not nearly enough research on how marginalized people are impacted and changed by our advancing technology and inability to correctly use and implement a nuanced vocabulary. Although current research trends include consideration for marginalized identities, we believe those identities require much more attention than they are currently afforded. We hope our presentation opens the eyes of those in this field to the importance of considering how our advancements and information access changes can be potentially harmful to those who are not considered the norm. Going forward we hope that all people are carefully considered in the ongoing process of advancing technology and information user access.

When the Community Leads It Succeeds: The Necessity of Community-Led Research (CLR) in Academia

Maddie Ferrell, Kaden Graham, Jessie Meager, Griffin Powell, J.J. Tolentino

The purpose of this symposium panel is to explore instances of extractive research and to juxtapose those cases to possible solutions and tools that might be useful to researchers within the information sciences and beyond. The questions posed by our presenters will analyze how extractive research actively harms communities; how information scientists may conduct ethical research; and how other fields of study may utilize community-based approaches to research. Part One of this panel will discuss The East Baltimore Research Project (EBRP), which was launched in 2017 in order to stop local community members from “being researched” by researchers with no context or understanding of life in the area. The EBRP is an excellent example of a successful community-led research initiative, and our panel will further explore the role of community-led research projects in combating extractive research practices.

Part Two will focus on Design Thinking. Human-Centered Design Thinking is a social innovation practice that relies on local community expertise to uncover community-based solutions. This practice encourages researchers to fully immerse themselves in the lives of the communities that they seek to help, and to rapidly design innovative solutions that directly address a community’s needs. By using Design Thinking, researchers can create a more collaborative, respectful, and equitable research process that is centered around the needs and perspectives of the community. Part Three warns researchers on the harms of extractive research. It is not enough for information scientists to investigate from a distance, they must approach with the community’s perspective at the forefront. Approaching the community for input diminishes harmful impacts of cultural bias by researchers which may lead to non-inclusive data collection. Extractive research actively harms the notion of community integration in academia. One recent example is the Hobby Lobby smuggling scandal, in which Hobby Lobby forfeited more than 3,000 illegal artifacts to the federal U.S. government, who then repatriated the objects to Iraq. Ancient objects not only provide a sense of cultural identity but also, when kept in their originating country, provide a tourism industry which brings in money to the local economy. When these artifacts end up in black markets and sold to U.S. businesses, museums, or heritage centers, the research provided by these objects has been removed from the consent of the originating country, and actively hurts their community through loss of revenue.

The two examples in this panel—the EBRP and the Hobby Lobby scandal—are juxtaposed for better understanding of the impacts that community input may have on academic research, while the discussion on design thinking and on harms of extractive research complement the examples by providing useful perspectives on why community-centered approaches are preferable to extractive research approaches.

Academics

Working as students

Simone Gillespie, Mary Schrader, Sarah Waugh, Sophie Kim, Andrew Sadler, Melissa Alexis

This panel will focus on topics relating to working while in graduate school, especially those related to masters of information and library science students. It will draw upon panelists’ personal experiences, data from a survey sent to UNC-SILS students, audience engagement with that data, and academic articles on the subjects.

The first portion of the panel will cover internships, and subsequent topics will include career preparedness and personal student experiences in graduate school, such as experiences surrounding students’ work-life balance, mental health, and finances. The internship panelist, Sarah Waugh, will discuss her experiences at Duke University Libraries as the Behind the Veil: Documenting African-American Life in the Jim Crow South Digitization Intern and as an oral history unit intern at the State Archives of North Carolina, supplemented by survey data. She will use survey data, her own experience, and scholarly articles to emphasize the importance of a well-planned, fairly compensated internship that benefits both the intern and the institution, especially since the pandemic.

Andrew Sadler will present on career preparedness and hands-on experience in the LIS fields and how a Library and Information Science education can prepare students for the fast-paced professional world. Topics covered include speed training, disability and accessibility education, graduate employment, the use of graduate assistants, consulting practicums, and whether LIS programs adequately prepare new librarians for their roles. Overall, the speaker will emphasize the importance of practical experience and training, collaboration between LIS programs and employers, and addressing gaps in the curriculum to better prepare students for their future careers in the field.

Personal student experience panelists Simone and Mary will focus on the idea of mental health and work life balance. Utilizing a number of scholarly articles, personal experience and the data gathered from the proposed survey the panelists will seek to address issues such as burnout, struggles with time management and quality of work, and the mental state of these students.

Beyond Scholarly Publishing: Open Access is Not So Open-and-Shut

Luke Barron, Jiajia Chen, Collin Drummond, Megan Mead, Caroline Pate

The Biden Administration has declared 2023 the “Year of Open Science,” and more than twenty years after Open Access entered the scholarly publishing world, we are overdue for a careful look at what Open Access is for, what it means, and what it costs. Open Access is often viewed as a niche within the field of Scholarly Publishing, but the struggle between property rights and information access is not unique to scholarly publishing. This panel examines the implications of information access including the perspectives of Western and non-Western academia, journalism, labor economics, and indigenous knowledge. All of these concurrent information access structures revolve around the same question–who should control information access?

Library & Information Access: A Collaborative Examination of How UNC-CH Addresses Access Across the Field of Library and Information Science

Cass Ostrander, Joel Collier, Samone Jacobs, Shiloh Jines, & Stephanie Johnson

Through various lenses, we will look at how the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill addresses library and information access across the field of Library and Information Science. We will examine what it means to consider external community members as institutional stakeholders, the diversity of makerspaces in an academic setting, accessibility to and representation of marginalized communities within the collections, the new(er) socioeconomic digital divide, and finally we will look at curated digital exhibits and social media as engagement tools with communities.

Some of the questions we considered:

How can UNC-CH and other academic libraries provide equitable access to resources for external community members

What is the effect and impact of initiatives to diversify makerspaces in academic libraries

Do the so-called values of “diversity and inclusion” actually contribute to making the field of library and information science more accessible to (and representative of) marginalized students, researchers, professors, etc.?

How has the switch to online access for information and classes hindered students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds or in rural settings with a severe lack of internet access?

How do UNC-CH libraries and archives use digital resources to expand access to their collections and engage with the community?

We will use openly available resources from places like the American Library Association, and the commentary of leaders in this field of research, to examine our topics. Attendees will hear from us individually and as a group, as we discuss interesting findings and difficult conversations. Examining any system, especially one in which we are directly involved as students, can be daunting. However, we hope attendees will walk away with a better understanding of the different ways we, as an institution and as individuals, can make UNC-CH and our library system better for all users.

Digital ethics

Ethical Considerations in Developing AI Chatbots

Jiayi Chen, Jenny Chueh, Luyao Pei, Xinyu Peng, Xinxi Wei

As AI chatbots become popular to be used in a wide variety of industries nowadays, ethical considerations must be addressed to build an inclusive and diverse society. AI chatbots are always considered convenient and efficient. They can also help companies and organizations to reduce costs and allow employees to work on more important tasks. From customer services to education tools and healthcare, AI chatbots can influence a large portion of users from different gender, race, and age groups. Many engineers and designers who created chatbots might focus more on making the chatbot more human-like by using Natural Language Processing (NLP) techniques to increase user satisfaction. Therefore, they might lose sight of some underlying ethical implications which lead to negative consequences for users and the organization that used the chatbot. Furthermore, both collecting training data and filtering inputs from users are crucial in ethics in AI chatbots because some of the chatbots not only provide responses based on the training data, but they can also learn from new data which is the input from users. Our research group is going to discuss the topic of ethics in AIchatbots from five key dimensions to increase the awareness of developers, policymakers, and users, including bias and discrimination, privacy and data protection, inappropriate content and language, job displacement and inequality, and plagiarism and sourcing. These five topics differ in the effects and what ways they can cause harm to people and communities, but designers need to consider all of them when generating a chatbot. As AI chatbots continue to evolve in different domains, it is important to develop solutions to avoid harm caused by chatbots. Designers can collaborate with experts with diverse backgrounds to ensure that the chatbot is designed with inclusivity and promote equity and equality.

Data Ethics and User Privacy

Kuangzheng Zhao, Ye Liu, Joshi Ramya Teja Battula, Yating Ke, Tong Pan

As the collection and use of personal data become increasingly prevalent in modern society, the issue of data user privacy and ethical data handling practices has become a pressing concern. People store data at different platform, online or offline. With the potential for sensitive information to be misused, mishandled, or even stolen, it is vital that organizations and individuals alike take steps to protect the privacy and security of personal data. Additionally, there is a growing recognition of the ethical considerations surrounding the use of personal data, including the need for transparency, informed consent, and responsible data stewardship.

Data privacy is a major topic today for both individuals and companies. It is crucial because it protects individuals from potential harm caused by the misuse of their personal information. Without proper data privacy measures, personal information such as name, address, social security number, and credit card information can be stolen or used inappropriately for malicious purposes. For example, hackers can use stolen data to commit identity theft, fraudulent purchases, and other criminal activities. Moreover, data privacy is important for maintaining trust between individuals and organizations that collect their information. When individuals trust that their data is being handled responsibly and ethically, they are more likely to engage in online activities, share their personal information, and participate in digital communities. Additionally, data privacy is critical for protecting sensitive data related to an individual’s health, political views, sexual orientation, and other personal aspects of their lives. The misuse of this information can have significant negative impacts on individuals and can cause psychological harm, discrimination, and other adverse outcomes. Therefore, data privacy is a fundamental right that must be protected to ensure the safety, security, and well-being of individuals in the digital age.

This panel will explore various aspects of data privacy, including best practices for protecting personal data, effective responses to data breaches, and data privacy considerations in healthcare, financial services, and social media.

Misinformation in Social Media

Irena Brain, Hannah Holmes, Nishitha Bottu, Jess Green, Chandramouli Velicheti

Over the course of the past 8 years we have seen the impact of misinformation on our society, from the most recent presidential elections to the global COVID-19 pandemic. Misinformation refers to inadvertently disseminated false or misleading information. The various characteristics of misinformation and its interventions in various settings have been highlighted in prior study on misinformation in social media. The World Economic Forum named “misinformation” as one of the world’s risks.

The biggest source of this misinformation has been born and shared across several social media platforms to the point it is hard for society to determine which information is factual and which information is inaccurate and incorrect. Many people today use social media as a source of knowledge because information can be shared so quickly and with so many different people. Combatting the effects of misinformation is an important step in moderating fake news and mitigating the risks associated with it.

The traditional way of ceasing the spread of misinformation is determining fact from fiction; however, some studies have discovered that this is insufficient in preventing the spread depending on how visible the material has been. Research has shown the flow of information through social media platforms such as Twitter and Facebook as well as how fast information can be spread. Through social media, viewers are more likely to believe something they have seen multiple times and are more likely to share something that they believe to be true. In this context, misinformation can be slowed and eventually stopped by controlling the exposure of the false content. Against the backdrop of the emerging Information Science research focused on social media and the impact of misinformation during recent events we identified disaster, health, and politics as specific domains for a review on social media misinformation. This panel will discuss current misinformation trends, the ethics and behavioral analysis trends, and how we as information professionals can aid in preventing misinformation.

Other

Causes and Effects of Information Overload

Kama Cerimele, Adam Hudnut-Beumler, Ikra Javed, Ash Kelly, Yehee Kim

Join us for the story of information overload— how it came to be, affects individual wellbeing, and impacts society. A tale of cause and effect, we present narratives of overabundant information from past through present alongside analyzing coping methods developed to mitigate. In the pandemic’s wake, our discussion outlines “overload” within our Web 2.0 predicament; we detail symptoms—both individual (e.g., anxiety) and societal (e.g., misinformation)—and ameliorative strategies to manage the “info-glut” (e.g., via social media). Lastly, comparing past techno-social arrangements to now, our panel investigates the question, “Who benefits from ‘information overload’ as the status quo?”

Posters

So Real It’s Scary – Deep Fake and Voice Mimicry Technology

Peyton Black, Joshua Evers, Eleanna Janowski, Mikayah Oxendine

Abstract: With the advancement of artificial intelligence, facial and voice mimicry software like DeepFake and Microsoft’s VALL-E are creating increasingly convincing replications of non-consenting individuals’ likenesses. This creates a major ethical dilemma, as the products of such software can be used to harm the subject’s reputation by making them seemingly say or do something they never said or did. Celebrities, politicians, and online entertainers are most at risk, seeing as they already have a large repository of reference footage online for the AI to use. Greater regulation should be in place to prevent this technology from being used maliciously.

AI’s Impact on Ghost Work

Julia Crume, Cody Garvin, Rashi Jagani, Matthew Stavish

The increasing prevalence of artificial intelligence (AI) has left many individuals concerned that their jobs will be automated. However, there are many tasks, such as translation, content moderation, and image-tagging, that cannot be completed without a human touch. As a result, there is a workforce of people performing these tasks on contractual basis for little pay and no benefits; this gig work is often referred to as “ghost work”. Our research analyzes the ethical implications of ghost work, and how the nature of this work will evolve as the automation power of AI grows.

AI and the Future of Work: Navigating Ethical Dilemmas in the Use of Predictive Analytics and Machine Learning

Lauren Allen, Hao Zhang, Laura Tinkler

The ethical implications of AI’s impact on employment and the labor market are explored. Issues such as the displacement of human workers, surveillance, and the future of work are examined. The perspectives of workers, employers, governments, and AI technology developers are analyzed. Possible courses of action are suggested, including upskilling workers, gradual introduction of AI, governmental regulations, and continued research and education. It is found that the ethical implementation of AI requires transparency, accountability, and fairness to avoid perpetuating workplace inequalities.

Breaking Barriers: Information Literacy for Underrepresented Communities

Alicia Slater, Andres Martinez, John Musselman

In an epoch of unprecedented access to information, the significance of information literacy cannot be emphasized enough, especially for underrepresented communities. This presentation delves into the vital role of data literacy in cracking down on systemic hindrances and empowering groups who encounter socioeconomic, linguistic, or technological obstacles. By comprehensively scrutinizing the challenges underrepresented communities face in accessing and utilizing information, we will exemplify how information literacy can be a powerful instrument for fostering social justice and inclusivity. We will analyze the conjunction of information literacy and social justice, showcasing how intersections can promote equity and inclusivity in various contexts.

Is AI Stealing from Artists?

Naomi Admasu, Stephen Cho, Ruiyi Di, Nina Geodakyan

The growth and advancement of Artificial Intelligence has boosted the development of creative artistic work. AI driven image generation has captured the attention of the Internet as users began to feed the technology prompts from concepts to artist’s names to generate art that emulates a particular style without crediting or compensating the original creators. Stability AI was trained on copyrighted content from the LAION-5B database, which indexed billions of images across the Internet without consent or licensing. Our project will discuss the ongoing litigation of the technique behind the system while exploring intellectual property, copyright and fair use.

Do smartphones improve or reduce workplace productivity?

Nora McNabb, Thaddeus Jackson, Tyler Dean

The research question asks whether smartphones improve or reduce workplace productivity. This is a relevant question as smartphones are integral to the modern workplace. Smartphones promote efficient communication, easy access to information, and flexibility. Smartphones have the potential to not only benefit the company but also increase employee well-being by allowing employees to take a break from work. However, smartphone usage also has the potential to become a tool for distraction rather than a helpful resource. It is important to recognize when smartphone usage becomes more of a hindrance than an advantage.

Visual and Audio Deep Fakes: A Manipulation of Reality

Robert Barringer, Ellis Kay, Katie Webb

Deep fakes are computer-generated media that appear to be real but are actually synthetic. They can be used to create false videos or audio recordings of people saying or doing things they never did. The rise of realistic deep fakes poses a serious threat to society, as they can be used to spread misinformation, defame individuals, or manipulate public opinion. As technology advances, it is becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish deep fakes from authentic content, making it essential to develop new tools and techniques to detect and combat them.

Exploring Informed Consent through the lens of Terms & Conditions

Morgan Kennedy, Iteka Shah, Julianna Sorkin

Informed consent within the context of data protection and privacy ethics is an elusive concept to identify in practice. At a cursory level, by agreeing to terms and conditions or a privacy policy that is presented to users, it could be inferred that their consent is informed. This study seeks to confirm or disprove this hypothesis and explore the ethical implications if informed consent cannot be realistically assumed.

NSA Surveillance: Is it Really Worth It?

Jackson Sommers, William Ross Finegan

An examination of how the National Security Agency carries out surveillance in the digital age. This includes a look at what types of surveillance activities the National Security Agency carries out, when and how these activities are used, and what the potential benefits and downsides to these activities are.

2023 Archive

Jump to: