[Libs-Or] What will the future look like? Consumers may decide

[Diedre Conkling]

http://www.districtdispatch.org/2014/08/will-future-look-like-consumers-may-decide/

What will the future look like? Consumers may decide
Posted on August 5, 2014
<http://www.districtdispatch.org/2014/08/will-future-look-like-consumers-may-decide/>
by Margaret Kavara <http://www.districtdispatch.org/author/mkavaras/>s

Last week, the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF)
hosted a panel discussion
<http://www.itif.org/events/big-data-cloud-computing-how-it-creating-new-era-disruptive-innovation>on
IT and disruptive innovation featuring the authors of *Code Halos: How the
Digital Lives of People, Things, and Organizations are Changing the Rules
of Business.*

The discussion focused on the way in which consumers leave a code trail, or
“halo” in virtually everything they do from personal finance to fitness
pursuits to enjoying music. Thanks to the internet of things, predictive
sites such as Pandora and Netflix, and industry-disrupting services like
Uber and Airbnb, user data can be generated across the span of our
day-to-day lives. This data can reveal surprising patterns about us; panel
moderator and President of ITIF Robert Atkinson shared the example of how
music preferences accurately predict political leaning. If you listen to
Garth Brooks, apparently you are overwhelmingly likely to vote Republican,
and Pandora has realized that selling user data on music preferences to
political organizations can be a profitable business.

But what about the role of government policy and the protection of privacy?
The panelists differed on the necessary approach to regulating the market
in the digital age, though they agreed on one key point: legislation will
not keep up with the rate of technology, and this will require placing a
huge amount of trust in corporations to “not be evil.” To some, that may
sounds like quite a paradox, but the panelists were overall enthusiastic
about innovation possibilities outweighing privacy dangers. They suggested
that because companies will rely on acquiring user data, they have an
incentive to be transparent and play by the rules in order to maintain
their customers’ trust and interest.
To assume that everyone can equally understand and navigate the internet
and the growing wealth of digital information is a narrow and inaccurate
perception

One argument presented stipulates that disruption actually gives consumers
more freedom and privacy by facilitating their ability to quickly
communicate with each other. It is easier than ever for individuals to
collect and share information about products and services, and through
sites and apps like Yelp and Tripadvisor, they can market successful
businesses to one another. Could this be a way for consumers to regulate
new emerging digital markets faster and more efficiently than government,
which is slow to keep up?

Another argument is that while disruptive innovation makes consumers less
able to remain anonymous to data-collectors, it actually allows them to
enjoy more privacy from their neighbors. In small towns, for example,
seeking online health information eliminates the concern of buying a book
when the salesperson knows your mother-in-law, or calling your doctor who
you will then see tomorrow at the PTA meeting.

However, many important policy questions remain. While the benefits of
disruptive innovation are giving consumers more for lower costs, what
becomes of jobs in sectors that are disrupted? What happens if the
government were to digitize services to maximize efficiency (like customs
offices at airports) and cuts thousands of jobs, often for working class
citizens? Will these displaced workers benefit from IT innovation and new
services, or will they be unable to afford access?

During the Q&A the topic turned to the digital divide. Questions from the
audience focused on how those who are disconnected from the world of tech
efficiency will fit into the new business frameworks that are being created
by disruptive innovation. Panelists’ answers indicated that like any
emerging innovation and infrastructure, IT will diffuse slowly from
concentrated markets outwards, just as electricity, cars, telephones,
trains, and film have in the past.

Perhaps not surprisingly, the conversation centered on consumers and
industries. Libraries were not discussed as “third space” providers and
access points to technology when discussing the digital divide. When I
raised the question of how the authors saw libraries being impacted by
disruptive technologies, they lauded the valuable public space libraries
provide, but debated whether we will need librarians, assuming everyone
will be able to find information online. Another thought that in the future
libraries will downsize, getting rid of the stacks and just having computer
access.

This fairly uninformed view of what librarians really do indicates the
growing need for libraries to amplify their voices in communicating all
that they offer <http://living-stories-living-libraries.tumblr.com/>,
curate, and make possible in both print and digital resources. The E’s of
Libraries, ™ facilitating education, empowerment, employment,
entrepreneurship and engagement, are growing increasingly more important
for a public in which digital literacy is still a significant challenge. To
assume that everyone can equally understand and navigate the internet and
the growing wealth of digital information is a narrow and inaccurate
perception, as is assuming that librarians will not be needed in playing
the role of information enablers and knowledge curators.

While there are many potential benefits in the decisions being made now in
the “early days of the new era of commerce” it is clear that many more
diverse discussions on the value of privacy, regulations, algorithm
analytics, censorship, and security will need to happen to ensure positive
development and social value added.

Libraries support the public interest in ways that the tech industry and
market cannot, and going forward into an innovative, disruptive era could
leave many trapped on the wrong side of the digital divide. Libraries are
vital because they are institutions not driven by profit, and are thereby
the best actor suited to teaching digital skills and helping the public
understand the benefits and tradeoffs that come with using new
industry-disruptive services. The unique space libraries fill in providing
training and equal access to new tech will remain highly relevant, timely,
and necessary as the digital revolution reinvents major sectors of society.




http://www.districtdispatch.org/2014/08/will-future-look-like-consumers-may-decide/




-- 
*Diedre Conkling*




*Lincoln County Library DistrictP.O. Box 2027Newport, OR 97365Phone & Fax:
541-265-3066Work email**: **diedre at lincolncolibrarydist.org*
<diedre at lincolncolibrarydist.org>
*Home email: **diedre08 at gmail.com* <diedre08 at gmail.com>

 “If you don't like something, change it. If you can't change it, change
your attitude.”―Maya Angelou
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://omls.oregon.gov/pipermail/libs-or/attachments/20140805/111a1a00/attachment.html>