Zimmerman, M. (2009). Technology and privacy erosion in United States libraries: a personal viewpoint. New World Library, 111(1/2), P.7-15.

“Technology and privacy erosion in United States libraries: a personal viewpoint” was written by Martin Zimmerman in 2009. Zimmerman is the electronic services librarian at the Long Island University. This article is written in the context of the American Government using technology to erode the public’s privacy. It is the author’s viewpoint that the libraries of America have been singled out for investigation, with the USA Patriot Act (USAPA) being used to target libraries.
The purpose in writing this review is to examine to main issues discussed and to consider the strengths and weaknesses of the article on the whole.

The main issue that the author raises is that the USAPA is being used to erode the privacy of citizens and to target libraries. Zimmerman gives examples of Government officials trying to force library employees to provide information on their patrons and states that library administrators show heroism and bravery (Zimmerman, 2009, p.7). The author also touches on the fact that the September 11 conspirators used libraries to communicate and alleges that this is used as a reason by the government to ‘target’ libraries.
Zimmerman then goes on to discuss ways technology can be used to erode our privacy; at home, in public and at the library. Examples of these technologies include: cameras, sensors, computer viruses and emails. The author then concludes by making the point that libraries need to be “ever vigilant in the protection of patron information” (Zimmerman, 2009, p.14).

“Technology and privacy erosion in the United States” has several strengths which contribute to the overall quality of the article. Some of these include the author referring to a large number of articles and citing examples to support his arguments. The author also shows that he has a firm conviction in the points that he is arguing by using strong language. Another strength is the clarity of the definitions and the rest of the article, with headings and paragraphs used logically.

Some weaknesses that offset the quality of the article include the author referring to only American libraries. While I recognise that the author lives and works in America, the article would have benefitted from examples of privacy erosion in the other countries. Inflammatory language is used, hoping to incite the readers into agreeing with the author’s point of view and to take a stand. Examples of this language include: “the many agencies that now watch our every move” (p.9), “as the boundaries of our privacy are attacked on all sides” (p.14), “target libraries” (p.10) and “nothing is safe anymore” (p.12). While Zimmerman uses a large number of references, he does not present any references that adopt the opposing side of the argument or that speak in favour of the USAPA. Due to this the article reads as being biased.

However due to the title stating that it is a personal view point the last two weaknesses mentioned may be forgiven because of the nature of the article. It is important to remember that this article is view point of only one man and that there may be many more views on this topic. Ways that this article could be improved involve using less inflammatory language, including details from libraries in countries other than America and presenting both sides of the argument.
In conclusion “Technology and privacy erosion in the United States: a personal viewpoint” provides an interesting look at privacy erosion in America, specifically in libraries. Further reading on this topic would need to be completed in order to receive a clear and unbiased view.