Are Law Librarians Who Accept Vendor Swag Committing Ethically Questionable Acts?

When Sarah Glassmeyer announced she was going to auction the proceeds of her unsolicited WestlawNext iPod Nano, I thought and wrote "good for Sarah." At the same time, I thought it was fine by me if anyone accepted similar vendor swag, noting with tongue firmly planted in cheek, that I was holding out for a WestlawNext iPad.

Sarah's announcement has created a bit of a kerfuffle in the law librarian blogosphere. Just check out the comments to her Vendor Swag post for starters and move over to her Blog Commenting Policy, Free to Good Home: iPod Nano and  The Ethical Librarian posts. In the latter post, Sarah calls attention to AALL's Ethical Standard. In making the case that the acceptance of vendor swag may be a professional ethics matter worth considering, Sarah quotes the Standard in what she characterizes as "I guess the most applicable" part, "We have a duty to avoid situations in which personal interests might be served or significant benefits gained at the expense of library users, colleagues, or our employing institutions.”

What Public Interest Is Served in Criticizing Legal Vendors? Tom Boone follows up on the matter in On professional communication and vendor relations. In it, he writes "What law librarian interest is served in publicly shaming a vendor over a disagreement?" Actually there is an important one. Vendors are not the enemy but when they commit what some may consider bonehead moves, provide very expensive and antiquated services and products, and control the market to the extent they do without being countered by our all too compliant professional association, the law librarian blogosphere kicks into gear and forces vendors to give pause. Case in point; who was invited to Eagan for a sneak preview of WestlawNext? Bloggers. And by my headcount they were not card carrying members of the "Friends of West" circle. About this Sarah wrote "I have to admit to being a little weirded out by the trip to Minnesota some of my colleagues were offered." I am not. It means blogging legal information professionals cannot be ignored by legal publishers. Nor can or have they been co-opted by the swag some received, kept or gave away. 

Questioning Vendor Swag. Sarah publicized an issue she believe requires some attention in her series of blog posts. She recognizes, in her words, her "standards are higher than others when it comes to accepting swag from vendors." When I read that statement, I took it to be a personal moral position. Sarah has re-framed the vendor swag matter in the context of professional ethics. Certainly this is a topic worth discussing and her opinion is well worth reading at The Ethical Librarian. I, for one, doubt the unsolicited receipt and acceptance of vendor swag, even an iPod Nano (or hopefully a WestlawNext iPad), is a "significant benefit" under the AALL Standard. But if vendor swag is ethically questionable under AALL's Ethical Standard, one better not walk away from the registration table in Denver carrying a vendor-branded bag full of vendor stuff inside.

I consider swag to be a personal decision, one that can to be elevated to the level of professional ethics but will go nowhere as a practical matter. Perhaps, the AALL Ethical Statement should place a dollar limit of what is acceptable without becoming a "significant benefit." But even if such an amendment were made, there will never be an enforcement mechanism for so-called ethical violations. Without one, what's the point; I doubt anyone really has the will to go there. (But if some do, please wait until I get my iPad from TR Legal).

Bottom Line. At the level of the profession, the thing that matters to me is that vendors do recoup some of the cost of their "freebies" in the invoices we pay. There's also a "goodwill" factor as in accounting standards, not vendor-library relationships. [JH]