Free Stuff – PolicyArchive.org

[Cross posted on LegalResearchPlus] We love free stuff! And, thanks to the Center for Governmental Studies, an interesting free resource is now available. The folks at CGS have just created the PolicyArchive. According to the PolicyArchive website:

"PolicyArchive is an innovative, new digital archive of global, non-partisan public policy research. It makes use of the power, efficiency, and economy of modern Internet technology to collect and disseminate summaries and full texts, videos, reports, briefs, and multimedia material of think tank, university, government, and foundation-funded policy research. It offers a subject index, an internal search engine, useful abstracts, email notifications of newly added research, and will soon expand to offer information on researchers and funders, and even user-generated publication reviews. Over time, it will grow to include policy content from international and corporate organizations."

They ask that you register on the front page. But take a look at the site. You can view 12,000 plus documents, including some CRS reports. There are also handy indexes, too. Take a look and if you have research to contribute to the site, they have a link for adding content. I also signed up for the free newsletter for the latest policy additions to the collection.

Hat tip to the terrific Sunlight Foundation blog for spotting this new resource.

Continue reading

Continue Reading →

Changing Title 44: Please Not Yet

I've been following the discussion on the GPO regionals report and especially the back and forth on whether to push for revising Title 44. I posted a response to the godort list that I'd like to share here: I really didn't want to write about the Regionals Report until I had a chance to actually read through the 100 plus pages. But with the recent GODORT discussion about changing Title 44, I feel like I need to chip in on this one issue. I am in total agreement with Stephen Hayes, who said, "DO NOT GO THERE. DON'T OPEN THAT PANDORA'S BOX. DO NOT TRY AND REVISE TITLE 44 UNLESS YOU WANT TO LOSE WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE." This is not the time to press for changes to Title 44. I say this as someone who feels that Title 44 could use some major changes -- starting off with eliminating the Sales program and creating a permanent endowment fund for GPO operations, especially cataloging, documents distribution and building on FDSys to create geographically dispersed, local electronic collections. But I think we have a lot of educational work ahead of us AND a political culture to change. Both parties in Congress have shown themselves (as a group) to be: - Largely ignorant about technological/internet issues. - Lukewarm to hostile about Net Neutrality. - If we don't have Net Neutrality, any all e-docs program will die an inglorious death. - Sympathetic to privatization of government information products. - Too eager to support copyright absolutists by passing perpetual copyright on the installment plan. - Believe that libraries are on their way out because "Everything is on the Internet" - Unwilling to free their own stuff (CRS reports, etc) While there are individual Members of Congress who don't fit the stereotypes above, I think the above statements are a pretty fair characterization of Congress as a whole, no matter which party has power. In this climate, I think that reopening Title 44 will likely lead to more privatization, more wholesale going digital regardless of supporting infrastructure and possible cost-recovery mandates. One thing I think it is important to do is for GODORT and individual depository libraries to ramp up education and outreach to Congress and the general public. We need to get awareness of the uniqueness of our collections, free government databases and librarian expertise into the thinking of policymakers and constitutents alike. We should try running with GPO's "Easy as FDL" campaign for awhile. Then when we've helped people to understand that society benefits from free, unrestricted (mostly) access to information and from having experts in using that information, then it may be time to teach them about how much better it could be if we could have some changes to Title 44. Trying to make changes to Title 44 before we've established our importance in the public mind and in the minds of policymakers seems like a mistake to me. Changes will be made that will benefit the interests of people who have established themselves as important parts of society. Just my $0.02. Now I'll do my best to actually read the regionals report. It's so sad that we can't all be fully informed about everything, even within our own field. Continue reading

Continue Reading →

RIP George Carlin

I'm sure you've all seen the news that [w:George Carlin] (May 12, 1937 - June 22, 2008) passed away yesterday from heart failure (NYT obit). Carlin was an amazing comic and, what's more, a keen (if somewhat vulgar!) observer of the American condition including our politics and government. He's no doubt sitting on some roof somewhere laughing at all of us schmucks (see Frisbeetarianism!). (Warning: NSFW!)

Continue reading

Continue Reading →

Crowdsourcing political debates, speeches, advertisements etc

Piling on Jim's recent post about Web sites pushing for transparency, my buddy Howard just tweeted about a new site called Speechology -- "User-powered analysis of political debates, speeches and campaign ads." The developers got a minigrant from Sunlight Foundation in order to build a site that would archive political speeches/advertisements etc so that the public could then crowdsource (aka collaboratively fact-check) and discuss them. Nicely done!

While watching the countless debates of the 2007-2008 primary season, we noticed a trend: Moderator asks politician a question, politician dodges the question and instead uses the time to rehash his/her platform, moderator thanks politician and moves on to next question. In other cases, the candidates on stage would go back and forth, unequivocally contradicting one another on points of fact. The moderator--a journalist--simply moved on, leaving voters in the dark as to the truth. The ads on television were no different: quotes taken out of context, completely unchecked accusations, citations in miniscule type...All of these political videos left us wondering who was right, and who was lying. We created Speechology so that we don't have to wonder anymore. Speechology is an archive of videos that show politicians stumping for your vote. If a candidate said it on TV, we want you to be able to find it on here. But instead of just showing you the video, we invite you to do your own research and then tell the rest of us what you found. Speechology is a place that does not care what your political preferences are. We only care if you contribute good research. If you would like to argue over politics, go somewhere else. Here, we value facts.
Continue reading

Continue Reading →

Web Sites Push For More Transparency and Accessibility In Government

Web Sites Push For More Transparency and Accessibility In Government, By K.C. Jones, InformationWeek, June 23, 2008. This article describes the work of OpenCongress and MetaVid, which give citizens an open window into government activities.

OpenCongress ...gives readers access to more detail and depth of information than traditional news stories. The free, open source, nonpartisan site does so by combining traditional news stories, summaries of bills, sponsors, status, roll calls on the latest issues put up for votes, and an area for user comments. ...MetaVid... archives video from proceedings in the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. Citizens who want to see what their representatives said on a specific issue can search for and play the specific footage they see.
Continue reading

Continue Reading →

Archives

Powered by WordPress / Academica WordPress Theme by WPZOOM