Why I don’t post to Archives and Archivists

There’s been a lot of talk about the use of the Archives and Archivists listserv, #thatdarnlist, and blogs rather than listservs as fora for discussion by SAA members.  I’m only going to address one small part of this larger debate: why I don’t post to the Archives and Archivists listserv.

1. Difficult to access: Although this has been made easier with the advent of the new website, A&A has always been difficult to sign up for.  It is located on a part of the website away from anything else, meaning that you would have to go to that page specifically wanting to sign up for “Email Discussion Lists.”  You also need a separate login and password from the credentials that govern your SAA profile to be able to sign into the listserv system.  In an age where integration of web services is becoming the norm, a separate system is just not something to which people want to go.

2. Intimidating personae: Once you get people to subscribe to A&A, however, many aren’t posting.  In any forum of communication, there are going to be people who are more active than others.  But when those people dominate the conversation to the exclusion of others, then it becomes a problem.  Is it entirely their fault? Of course not.  People also need to just plunge into the conversation.  However, if they feel that posting something to the list is not worth the resulting conversation, they won’t do it.

3. Listservs are Web 1.0 technology in a Web 2.0 world: As has been mentioned on A&A, it has been in existence since 1989; listservs themselves have been around since 1986, making them one of the first methods of communication over the internet.  They have an important place in the communication of some organizations, but those are primarily more technical ones.  Most of the lists to which I subscribe that have actual discussion are in the Linux community.  More and more, people today aren’t thinking of listservs as locations of discussion; even fora, that staple of mid-1990s Internet life, are being pushed aside.  Discussions have moved to blogs, to Twitter, to Facebook, and to other social networking sites.  I personally read A&A through an RSS feed in my Google Reader, so that it can be with the rest of the information I regularly consume.  However, I didn’t know that was possible for the longest time, having to search through the back messages to find it.  Perhaps if this was made more public, more people would sign up and perhaps some of those people would contribute.  I understand the need for a place of discussion sanctioned officially by SAA; I just don’t think people should be surprised when conversations happen in more than one location.

Finally, I welcome any discussion about this topic that may occur.  I, like most blog owners, would never delete comments that simply disagrees with my opinions.

Posted in Archival Issues | Tagged , , , | 15 Comments

Library of Congress, Twitter, and catching up after a vacation

I just got back from a week long vacation, and while I was there I didn’t really check my computer; I checked my email, prepared for an interview, and thats about it.  So, now that I have returned, I’m presented with a problem: should I try to catch up on things like my Google Reader and Twitter, or should I just give up and let all that stuff go away unread?

Well, I’ve already kind of decided what I’m going to, and that decision was made for me by the set up of the websites. With my Google Reader, I’m trying to catch up on the things I missed, quickly scanning through titles and deciding whether or not I’ll read the whole post.  A few feeds I’ve already marked as read instead of scrolling though them; however, I’m skimming through most of them.  This will take awhile (I still have over 1000 unread), but I’m still going to do it.

Twitter, however, has a built in ephemeral quality.  There’s no way to know how many tweets you haven’t read, at least on the main Twitter website and Brizzly, the client that I use.  Even if I could go back and see what I have and haven’t read, I don’t think I would go back and read many of the tweets.  Tweets are more heat of the moment sort of posts and, without context, a lot of the meaning can be lost.  This makes me think about how the Library of Congress is going to make Tweets accessible.  Are they just going to dump the tweets out there, making a giant database of text available by itself, or are they going to try and surround it with context to allow people to make sense of more of the tweets?  Are they going to try and make a database of hashtag meanings? The newspaper Guardian did this in a slight way by creating twitter recaps of World Cup matches.  They measured the popularity of certain terms on Twitter in real time as the match progressed and it was very interesting.  But adding this sort of context to 140 characters worth of information will obviously involve a lot of work.  It will be interesting to see what LoC decides to do when and how they make this database available.

Posted in Archival Issues, Technology | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Australia to ban certain websites

The federal government of Australia is considering banning its citizens from viewing a list of 10,000 websites that it deems objectionable. Specifically, the the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy said that the list of banned websites will include:

sites containing child sexual abuse imagery, bestiality, sexual violence, detailed instruction in crime, violence or drug use and/or material that advocates the doing of a terrorist act.

Now, I’m all for getting rid of child pornography.  But banning a list of 10,000 websites will not do a thing to stop the child pornography industry.  People in Australia who want to view it will still do so, either using proxy servers or visiting any of the multitude of websites that aren’t on the banned list.  It is really just a stunt, aimed to convince people that their government is trying to do something to prevent child pornography without actually doing anything.  Instead of trying to really address the situation, by prosecuting those who create, distribute, or view child pornography, their merely assuaging their own guilt and scoring political points while doing so.  Whipping up a list with some websites on it and blocking them is easy; actually doing something about the problem of child pornography in the world is very hard, requiring the cooperation of the entire world, and apparently not something the Australian government wants to do.

It also sets a dangerous precedent. An older list, obtained by Wikileaks and containing 2,000 websites, included such things as “the websites of a dentist from Queensland, a pet-care facility in Queensland, and a site belonging to a school cafeteria consultant.” Not only does this blocklist carry the risk of accidentally banning perfectly legitimate sites, but it could also lead to the government banning other sites in the public’s interest.  It is a slippery slope to full on censorship, and not one we want to get even close to.

Posted in Technology | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Final master’s paper

I’m finally finished with my master’s paper!  The title ended up being “‘Finding What, You Know?’: A Content Analysis of the Websites of Archival Repositories for Markers of Archival Intelligence.”  Here’s the abstract if anyone wants to read it; it will be available online from the SILS website sometime over the summer.  I’ll link to it when it is available.

This study is a content analysis that investigates whether the user education resources available on the websites of archival repositories reflect an understanding of Archival Intelligence. This was done by analyzing the websites of thirty archival repositories, selected from the list of the member institutions of the Association of Research Libraries. The findings of the study indicate that the websites of most archival repositories do not reflect an understanding of Archival Intelligence. The study also suggests that archival repositories are not currently taking advantage of the Internet as a medium for user education, which is necessary in a time where the only interaction many users have with an archival repository is through its website.

I’ve also attached it to this post, if anyone wants to read it.  I’m also going to maybe start posting here again more often, but I’ve said that before.

“Finding What, You Know?”: A Content Analysis of the Websites of Archival Repositories for Markers of Archival Intelligence.

Update: Now updated with actual working link to my paper.

Posted in Archival Issues | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Master’s paper update

I’m chugging along on my master’s paper, which is due three weeks from today.  I am finishing up the data collection as we speak, and I want to have a draft finished by next Monday.  What I’ve found so far is that there is a decent amount of archival intelligence material on these websites; however, the information is scattered all across various pages.  Only 3 out of the 14 websites I’ve looked at so far have a dedicated page for user education; for the rest, I’ve had to scour their websites hoping to find information.

We’ll see what the rest of the data collection finds.  Also, sad to say that I never got a reply from the Eloquent Systems people about the email I sent them… oh well.

Posted in Life | Leave a comment

Archives vendor spreads fear, uncertainty, and doubt about free software

For those of you who don’t know, I am a member of the free/open source software community.  I have used versions of Linux on my personal computer for four years now.  I run this server and this installation of WordPress on a Debian GNU/Linux installation on a computer that sits in my living room.  I contribute bug reports and post on various fora to help both developers and users.

I am, obviously, also a member of the archival community, and I got an email yesterday that really made me angry.  It was from an archival vendor, Eloquent Systems Inc., the seems to provide software that fills the same role as Archon.  In trying to convince me to purchase their system, they painted the entire free software community with a single stroke, saying that free software is basically unusable in a production environment.  They obviously have a right to compare themselves to other products and to state why they believe their product is better than this competition.  However, I feel that trashing an entire community is just ridiculous.  I’ve attached their email to me, along with my response, beneath the fold.

Continue reading

Posted in Archival Issues | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

David Price responds about PAHR

I emailed my representative, David Price, about the PAHR bill before the House a couple of months ago, and he finally responded to me today.  He basically says that the much of the records are held on the state level, the NHPRC gives out grants to states, he likes the NHPRC, but won’t commit to supporting PAHR.  He wants some sort of new state-based program, and he’ll “consider it carefully” when it comes up for a vote.

Its seems like what PAHR is going for is a state based solution: the states have to pay a 50% cost share to get money from this new grant funding agency.  I guess what he wants is the states to pay for 100% of it and have NHPRC be the only national funding agency.  With all the money thrown around in the past couple of years, whats another $50 million, which is far less than one-tenth of one percent of the national budget for last year.  I’m glad we’ve gotten to 50 co-sponsors, and maybe we’ll soon have some debate and even a vote on it.

Full email from David Price after the fold.

Continue reading

Posted in Archival Issues | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Appropriating the word “archive”

Gmail uses the word “archive” to describe the action of moving mail out of your inbox and into the “All Mail” folder.  Barnes and Noble, on their new nook ebook reader, uses the word “archive” to actually mean delete!  When you click on the “Archive” button, it deletes the file off of your nook, although it is still available to redownload from their website.

The technology world has appropriated the word “archive” and have made it mean “hidden from view, but still accessible.”  Gmail is telling people that they don’t have to delete any email anymore: just keep it all, and archive it.

Archivists don’t have the resources to keep everything.  In the digital world, the phrase that is commonly used is “disk is cheap.”  However, the time of archivists isn’t cheap and that don’t have a lot of it to give.  Processing backlogs are already big, and even the advent of “More Product, Less Process” style processing hasn’t cut into backlogs that much.

But what about digital files? Surely we can keep all of those, since we don’t have to worry about physical space nearly as much.  However, describing these files properly is just as important as describing physical, paper files.  We have a Google site search on the Southern Historical Collection’s website; it is not that sophisticated of a search system, but it is a popular search system.  And it basically does a full text search of all of our finding aids; with the system, you get a lot of hits that aren’t the best collections for the for which topic you are searching. Trying to do a similar sort of thing, the full text searching of all of our digital files, would lead to an explosion of that problem.  It would be very difficult to actually find the materials for which you are looking.

Is there a way to get the word back?  I don’t think we can just abandon it, since a fundamental word of our profession.  The general public probably doesn’t need to know everything about archival theory, but they should probably know that we’re not just “the people who keep everything.”  I guess what we need is a sentence or two, an elevator speech, about who we are and what we do.  I think there might have been an SAA project about this, but we need to come up with something thats easy to understand, short, and lacking in jargon that truly explains what we do for people who don’t know.

Posted in Archival Issues | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

The word "archive"

There is a problem of language in the archival world.  And that first sentence has already run upon it, and it is both an internal community problem and an external, general problem.  We have lost control of the term “archive;” or, perhaps, we’ve never had control of it in the first place.

There are two different aspects of the archival community itself, the manuscripts/personal papers meaning of the term and the records management meaning of the term.  Both of them get lumped under the term archival, which causes some confusion.  I’ve been developing a series of tutorials for the Southern Historical Collection, and in trying to explain concepts and build “archival intelligence,” we’ve run into a problem of defining what an “archive” is.  A description of an archive as a place where manuscripts and personal papers are held doesn’t really describe the the form and function of University Archives.

I may be late to this, but it seems like this quote  “Archival is an approach rather than a quality” is how we should really began to describe what makes an archival repositories actually archival.  Archival materials are not manuscripts, books, diaries, photographs, etc.  They are not business records or records that an organization is required to keep by law. Archival materials are manuscripts, books, diaries, photographs, business records, or records that an organization is required to keep by law when these materials are selected, arranged, described, housed, and preserved in an archival repository.

This is not even to mention the appropriation of the word “archive” by people in general.   But I’ll talk a little bit about that in another post.

Posted in Archival Issues | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Sorry if I spammed your RSS feed

Hey everybody who’s on my RSS feed (all 4 of you), I’m sorry If I spammed your feed with all of my posts being reposted. I just moved my WordPress to a new server, which should be faster and better. This will also let me get updates from WordPress faster, since I’m now running Debian Testing instead of Ubuntu for my server.

All in all, it should be a better experience for all of us. Thanks!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment