Better ascertaining what the future might bring in
terms of information management might require a time-machine. As we “think-tank”
about bibliotruckas, MakerSpaces, and solutions to social problems, it is
timely to read about information policy. I’m finding the Braman article on “Defining
Information Policy” to be defining when wrestling with management of
information.
Other than the fact that information is valid,
comprehensive, theoretically sound, methodologically operationalizable, and
translatable; the aspects that are recognizable to me is that information
involves creation, process, flow, access and use. When considering the future
and management it is almost a concave/convex experience. One needs to be
preserve the present as it becomes past for its relevance in the future.
Let me be a bit more concrete. The small academic library
in which I’m employed has a special collection/archive which is bristling full
of brittle papers of professionals who have contributed their lifetime
collections to the school upon retirement. Everything! There’s old films, old
class notes, published works, journals, personal papers, photos, etc. How to
manage that into the future? In this day
and age, the answer seems easy – digitize. So management of future (present,
past) information really is technical consideration of accessibility of digital
content. Doesn’t really matter if you’re inside or outside of a library, does
it?
Are you with me on this?
References
Braman, S. (2011). Defining
Information Policy. Journal of Information Policy, vol. 1, pp.1-5.
I agree that the seemingly easy answer is to digitize. However, organizations must invest in the equipment needed to digitize. Luckily we have a digitization lab at WSU that can digitize everything from slides, microfilm, vinyl records, etc, but not everyone has that or can afford to invest in it. In that instance it becomes a matter of which is more important, preserving material or your budget? It may be that some digitizing companies exist or will be created to provide that service for organizations who don't want to do it themselves, but still find it important.
ReplyDeleteBefore making my visits to the MSU Special Collections and the Archives of Michigan, for our library visit assignment, I thought that both places would be actively moving their collections to the online environment or digitizing. I thought it would help manage all the information they've collected. After talking with Peter Berg, Head of Special Collections & Associate Director of Special Collections & Preservation, I found that even though they are at a critical point for storage he said that they will not be digitizing all the collections they have. Like Lauren mentioned in her reply, budget. Mr. Berg was very clear that the money had to come from somewhere to handle the cost of digitization. Also, there are some things in MSU's Special Collections that will never be available online. It could be the book or manuscript is far too fragile to go through the digitization process.
ReplyDeleteThe same was true after my visit to the Archives. Kris Rzepczynskik, a senior archivist, also said that their entire collection won't be available online. What he is working towards is making the search tools they have available online, like the information binders & indexes. Those tools help people narrow down a search to a collection and this will help the archivists find it in their vaults. This creates a database for what is in a collection and where it is kept in the building.
I agree that more companies will pop up offering digitization services. Some organizations may decide that preserving & restoring original documents is more important then making them digital. I think we will always have physical records. Plus, more & more books, etc. are being born digital. Does anyone agree?
I agree. Digitizing is fantastic in terms of accessibility of items to research, but it has its limitations due to budget concerns and the nature of the materials that exist in the archives. I do think that solutions can be found to some of the problems with digitizing fragile materials (like using a handheld scanner for brittle papers, and then digitally enhancing them so they can be read -- so long as they're not too fragile that they can't be handled at all). But for items like three-dimensional art that exist in archives, I don't think it's possible to observe them as thoroughly through digital records as you would be able to in person. There will always be a place for physical records of some type.
DeleteI think digitization is extremely important for accessibility and preservation purposes. However, I think that we need to not be so quick to discount the importance of the physical items themselves. For example, historical documents can tell researchers a great deal about the past that goes beyond the words on the page. Things can be learned from the paper and the ink, the amount of deterioration, etc. Also, there's something powerful about handling a document that has touched by a person of historical significance. Certain elements could be lost in the translation between physical and digital. I think that digitization is extremely important and valuable, but not at the expense of preservation as well.
ReplyDeleteThanks for commenting. The various aspects of archives and museum preservation decision-making might be more studied in our future coursework. It's that future accessibility that takes a crystal ball. Who hasn't seen an old BETA tape or reel-to-reel audio tape that no longer has any usefulness? 25 years from now will DVDs still be usable? What I do know from experience is that brittle paper does crumble when being scanned into digitized form. So it really takes knowledgable archivists, curators, and librarians to make those decisions. and now we have educated guidance from the IMLS (http://www.imls.gov/).
ReplyDeleteAs time goes on, more and more institutions are beginning to digitize their artifacts. When I was a Data Collections Intern at the Air Zoo, they were just beginning this process with their World War I and II military uniform collections. I had to move their collections to a more environmentally secure location (all the uniforms that weren't on display were found in the basement, stacked in piles - hello mold!), cover them with plastic, organize (based on which war, country, branch of military, rank, etc.), and create a detail record for each item. Once this was accomplished, I took pictures and helped in the creation of digital records. So, when discussing digitization, we have to realize that we're talking about more than paper, microfilm, etc.
ReplyDeleteInvesting in preservation, in my opinion, should come first; without preservation, we wouldn't have anything to digitize in the first place. This comes from my experience at the Air Zoo. Many of the uniforms, especially the AA leather jackets, were deteriorating. Age was certainly a factor, but the environment and manner in which they were stored also played a major role.
With cost the determining factor, libraries must prioritize what must be digitized. Just because items are old, doesn't mean they must be preserved for posterity. Should class notes be preserved at the expense of more potentially valuable materials? The format in which these items are preserved is also important. A format that is accessible today may not be in the future....
ReplyDeleteI definitely think it is time to digitize our local historical collections or any collection that we hold. We have patrons who cannot physically make it to our library yet we cannot send out some of this material to other libraries. I would rather see this material used than sit on the shelf for years collecting dust because those who are interested cannot make it to our library.
ReplyDeleteJust as librarians decline donations of outdated encyclopedias with firmness and civility they must also decline the trivial to dedicate time and resources to preserving that which is important. Stephen, thanks for the inside view re: the military uniform collection. I can imagine the holes in the wool; the cracks in the leather; the mold; the allergy flare-ups! Do you wear masks? How do you stand it? I think I would like the work if I could stand it health-wise.
ReplyDeleteYeah, it was a little overwhelming at first. I did wear gloves and a mask when dealing with the items. There were definitely some headaches related to exposure, but it was totally worth it!
DeleteThis is a topic that has been plaguing me since my visit to a hospital archive. Many of the items housed there seemed of trivial matter. Things that could easily have been digitized for easier access and to the benefit of space, were filed away. They had copies of newsletters (multiple copies) that were only a few years old. There were many books that had been donated that were of no significance. I agree with Rhonda on about cost determining what is worth preserving. Scanning articles or documents could be cost free other than the manpower. But, preserving items like Stephen mentions (be it manuscripts, films or clothing) can be very expensive. Perhaps there are other places that would find these items more beneficial than the library. I know when I worked in the public library patrons would donate books that were from the WWII era. Because donations were sorted by high school clerks these items were often relegated to the trash bin. It was sad to see.
ReplyDeleteThe debate about how, when and what to digitize is a forefront discussion matter for librarians now. It requires serious thought as it is a big budget item. However, thoughtful preservation is important for sharing our history.
ReplyDelete