Author Archives: James A Jacobs

A recent note on the govdoc-l mailing list (Review of e-LCSH, Nathaniel Kraft, 5 Oct 2005, Discussion of Government Document Issues) provides a glimpse of the government restricting access to government information in the digital environment. The message is an invitation to review Library of Congress Subject Headings, 28th edition ("e-LCSH"). Kraft says that, "The Government Printing Office (GPO) and Library of Congress Cataloging Distribution Service (CDS) are investigating options for electronic dissemination of CDS cataloging publications to federal depository libraries" but notes that "the Library of Congress Subject Headings is a CDS sale product for which costs must be recovered." The restrictions placed on use are explicit:

This electronic version is being made available to the Federal Depository Library Program with the condition that the files NOT be redistributed or made accessible outside the premises of participating FDLP libraries. If downloaded to a local server, the e-LCSH files must be placed on a location that is not accessible to Web crawlers or to users outside the premises of the FDLP library.

Continue reading →

Continue Reading →

Nearly Half a Million Dollars for University of Illinois and Pew Research Center Internet Investigation, Institute of Museum and Library Services press release, October 5, 2005.

The federal Institute of Museum and Library Services announced a cooperative agreement today with the University of Illinois Library Research Center (LRC) to investigate, in partnership with the Pew Internet & American Life Project, how effectively public libraries and community technology centers provide government information to people with limited access to the Internet. The agency awarded $495,053 for the national study; findings and recommendations for improving services to the public are expected in October 2007.

Continue reading →

Continue Reading →

Last month the Department of Education essentially exonerated itself of wrongdoing in producing fake news stories and covertly paying journalists to promote administration policies. (See: Does Covert Government Information = Propaganda?) Now, the Government Accountability Office says that payments to broadcast commentator Armstrong Williams to promote its "No Child Left Behind" policy were illegal, and that the payments violated prohibitions on funding "covert propaganda." It also denounced a prepackaged television story disseminated by the Education Department. Stories on the report:

• Buying of News by Bush's Aides Is Ruled Illegal, By ROBERT PEAR, New York Times, Section A; Column 1; Pg. 1 Sept. 30, 2005.
• Armstrong Williams Payments Illegal, Says GAO By John Eggerton, Broadcasting & Cable, 9/30/2005
Continue reading →

Continue Reading →

An example of the problems involved with the government relying on the private sector to provide access to government information is provided by the Federal Procurement Data System-Next Generation ("FPDS-NG"). This story from last February provides a good background on the issues.

Access Questioned In New Contract Database, by Rebecca Carr, Cox News Service, (02/04/05).

It describes how, for 25 years, the public could purchase CDs of federal contracting data for as little as $60 per quarter but that, in 2003, the General Services Administration paid a contractor $24 million to build a web based system. Problems with the sytem include:

• key search fields are not available
• users are required to register enabling the government to keep track of each user's research
• businesses and interest groups must pay a one-time fee of up to $2500
• A FOIA request for the data was refused

Continue reading →

Continue Reading →

The Los Angeles Times has an editorial about the subway map redistribution issue.

• Derailing iPod maps, EDITORIAL, Los Angeles Times October 3, 2005.

The editorial notes that there is no consistent solution to redistributing subway maps. The manager of www.ipodsubwaymaps.com has recreated some maps himself, the Metro system in Washington, D.C. has granted him permission to use theirs, and the New York MTA is demanding a fee of $500. The editorial notes that cities don't sell their subway maps, and neither is the website. In fact, the website is "saving the New York MTA and BART the expense of adapting their maps for the growing number of riders who keep iPods stuffed in their pockets or purses." And more:

The transit agencies may want to license their logos for T-shirts and baseball caps, but their maps should belong to the public.

Continue reading →

Continue Reading →