Flailing through the Archives

http://www.boingboing.net/2008/04/04/usfunded-health-sear.html

This is absurd.  I’m really ticked off.   This story has been picked up by multiple blogs already, but we were discussing Thesaurus(es? i?) in class yesterday, I thought it was really interesting.

Limiting search terms hurts everyone.  By removing a commonly used MEDICAL TERM from the thesaurus with no warning is irresponsible and is a violation of trust.

By limiting results as a search, both sides are hurt.  Anti-Abortion rights activists cannot access information that would help him, and Pro Abortion Rights activists cannot access information that would help them.  It doesn’t matter what side of this debate you are on, the censorship of a common medical term hurts everyone.  Say you wanted to write an editorial about abortion and wanted to search this database for information to make your point… because it is a federal funded database, you wouldn’t be able to get your information.

Now, how about that for not being a good thing?

http://bottledmonsters.blogspot.com/2008/03/history-of-medicine-viagra-10-years.html

Is Viagra part of history now?  Yes, yes it is, in my opinion.  Just think of the cultural changes since 1998.  Now think of the political changes.  And the economic changes.   Yes, 1998 is history now.

 http://www.archivesnext.com/?page_id=124

Nominate movers and shakers in the archive community.  Due date is April 30th.

http://feministlawprofs.law.sc.edu/ 

Want to learn new and interesting things that may or may not have to deal with Feminism and law?  Here’s the spot for you!

http://boingboing.net/

You’d be surprised how many times records and documents come up here.  Speaking of which:

http://www.boingboing.net/2008/04/01/libraries-and-the-oc.html 

Someone’s written a dissertation on how library cataloging systems marginalize the occult and make books about it difficult to find.  How cool is this student?

I’ve been mulling this over for a while now. If one of the primary reasons archivists are unwilling or afraid to come forward with information is possible litigation and job loss, then there should be a way to encourage whistle blowing or at least protections for archives that receive and make available materials like the cigarette papers.

I propose that archivists should consider an Archivists Legal Defense Fund. Modeled after the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund (CBLDF), which focuses on first amendment rights for comic book authors, the CBLDF is primarily funded through donations, which provides authors with legal defense. The CBLDF is not obligated to take every case that they receive. The Archivist’s Legal Defense Fund would have a different goal of reducing secrecy in the government and corporations by providing legal defense for archives, archivists, and records mangers that disclose information to the public.

The community would need to create stronger ties to lawyers, as well as the ACLU. Additionally, institutions can create ties to university law schools. The organization would run on donations from the archival community and would be open for petitions from individuals facing litigation related to disclosure. Cases submitted to the defense fund would not necessarily be defended. This would prevent defense of archivists and records managers who disclose trade secrets and proprietary information for unethical reasons.

There could be several benefits to creating this organization.
-Increased openness and accountability in government, NGOs, and corporations.
- Creation of an archival backbone,
- Increased professionalism and accountability.
- Legal protections
- Creation of a stronger sense of community.

Any thoughts?

(Crossposted to my Access and Ethics class blog)

I was cataloging a document, and instead of writing the actual title, I replaced “Service-Learning” with “Harry Potter.”

Am special.

Cross posted to Livejournal.

As the archival assistant here, I tend to get old video tapes chucked at me a lot.  This is both interesting and frustrating.  Interesting, because it turns shelving into a puzzle that involves moving vast numbers of VHS tapes around and frustrating because I don’t know if the tapes are important or if we have any paper description of them anywhere.

Today, I transcribed a tape at the 2002 Student Service Awards.   It was a speech given by Late Senator Paul Wellstone.   Seeing that he was kind of a big deal here, I decided to search for the text of the speech.   Alas, Sen. Wellstone gave two speeches that day.   One was two the DFL convention, and the other was at this awards ceremony.   The speech did not appear anywhere online.

So, I called up the state archives.   I talked to a lovely Reference Librarian who informed me that while the text of his speech probably exists in their archives, it has possibly not been accessioned yet, and, 6 years on (and this is just my understanding), they have not come to an agreement with the Wellstone family on how much should be released to the public.  Being a member of the public, it’s tough luck for me.

So, this morning was spent infront of a TV that has no remote control running back in forth, pausing it, rewinding it, playing it, and trying to type it out at the same time.  But we now have a paper copy of the text.

Over the weekend, between work and a bike race and eating far too much, I have been getting overly gleeful about various open source things. My dad installed Ubuntu on a computer he’s been trying to configure for ages, and had fantastic results. I was all rarin’ to go on the Archivist’s Toolkit for this morning, only to discover, ALAS, that the database program we’re using doesn’t use MARC XML.

There’s an option to export the data into an XML format, which would be fine and dandy, if it actually worked. According to the database manual, “XML is a new way to code…” Obviously, they didn’t think it would last, so they made the bloody thing export slower than molasses. No support of new technologies here. Bah. After about 45 minutes of waiting, 0% of the database has been exported into XML, so I’ve given up for now. The database will be down for all of Tuesday and Wednesday morning.

And then, there’s no guarantee that it will even work. Hopefully the database doesn’t explode and take my computer with it.

Because of commuting issues this morning, I am rather cranky and tired.  That will be my excuse for being rather short.

I have discovered the power of the double take: I told a co-worker at my unconventional other job I was a librarian (leaving off the “Mini” part), and her jaw dropped. She then  apologized for what she liked to read.

I’m going to make this statement once:

I don’t care what you read. If you’re enjoying it and will read more, then GREAT. If you’re reading classics just to impress, then what’s the point?

This is mildly, but not completely, related to the current Michael Gorman/Britannica Blog librarian drama, which relates more to social information tools such as wikipedia, blogging, and citizen journalism.   Unfortunately, the idea that academia knows best is not a new one:  there are “Good” things to read and “Bad” things to read.  “Good” things have been praised to the heavens by academics. “Bad” things are the books you’d hide from your high school English teacher

The problem comes people who only read “Bad” books may feel that if they can’t get their brains around something “Good” there is no point in reading at all.  Reading begets reading, and if there is a fundamental segregation between those who read “Good” books and those who read “Bad” books, then we’ve only succeeded in another form of playground bullying, with the nerdy elite as the perpetrators.