No Fee Access under FDSYS: Past Performance No Guide
In the latest issue of the Federal Depository Library Program's Administrative Notes, there is this item: Library Services and Content Management Update Remarks by Richard G. Davis Acting Superintendent of Documents Director, Library Services and Content Management At the Federal Documents Task Force Meeting ALA Annual Conference Saturday, June 23, 2007 Among other issues, Mr. Davis talks about the no-fee access to government information:
GPO Access – No Fee Access I also want to emphasize that GPO’s commitment to provide the public with no-fee access to Government information through the FDLP, including GPO Access, remains the same. GPO will not allow access to content available through GPO Access to be restricted, diminished, or based on user fees for the FDLP. The public will be able to continue to print and download this information through the FDLP without restriction into the future.While we at FGI greatly respect the 150+ year tradition of no-fee access and while we believe that Mr. Davis is sincere in his commitment, he cannot bind Congress or future GPO leadership. Free access (leaving aside NTIS and other cost recovery bits) is Congressional and GPO policy today, but only future leadership can determine policy in the future. Whatever access scheme is available in 2095, Ric Davis won't have put it into place. While GPO cannot guarantee permanent no-fee public access by simple decree, it stands at a crossroads where it can either facilitate no-fee access or make it possible for future leadership to institute a pay per view model. If GPO were to work with the library community and deposit non-DRM digital publications based on selection profile, those publications would remain available for access and preservation no matter what future GPO policy was. A future Congress and GPO wouldn't be able to successfully order over 1,000 libraries to destroy their files and sign up for a pay per view system. Where GPO is currently going however, is a centralized model where users have access to a central repository of files. Today that repository is free. It isn't subject to Digital Rights Management. But that's today. Because they have custody of the electronic publication, our free access depends on the the good will of GPO and Congress' unwillingness to change USC Title 44. But given enough time that can change. Especially in the secrecy and privatization-hungry environment Americans find themselves in today. That is why what we need is a decentralized, distributed system of depositing electronic files to local libraries willing to host them. Libraries need to step up to the plate, and a Government Printing Office wishing to facilitate permanent no-fee public access needs to help with training, storage estimates and simple section mechanisms like those used to select LOCKSS journals. Continue reading
U.S. Broadband Policy: Myth vs. Reality
The OECD released its semi-annual broadband penetration rankings (Broadband Statistics to December 2006), which show that the United States has fallen further to 15th among the 30 members of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. There has been some criticism of the report and attempts have been made to discredit it. (See for example today's Wall Street Journal Broadband Baloney by Robert M. McDowell. Wall Street Journal. (Eastern edition). Jul 24, 2007. pg. A.15; [WSJ subscription required]. Another copy here [Proquest subscription required]). A report by freepress directly addresses the criticisms of the OECD report.
- 'Shooting the Messenger' Myth vs. Reality: U.S. Broadband Policy and International Broadband Rankings by S. Derek Turner, Research Director, Free Press, July 2007
Release of the latest OECD report – unlike previous studies -- was met with a fierce response by incumbent providers and the think tanks they support, as well as prominent public attacks by several members of the executive branch. Free Press found that the major critiques leveled at the OECD data simply fall apart upon closer examination. The coordinated attempt to “shoot the messenger†cannot hide critical failures in the U.S. broadband market. These failures are chiefly due to poor policy decisions that have fostered an anti-competitive marketplace. Our European and Asian counterparts are outperforming us because they have policies that foster vigorous competition in the broadband marketplace, offering consumers more choice, faster speeds and lower prices. ...In 2004, President Bush set a clear goal for high-speed Internet access in the United States... The president clearly called for not only universal access by 2007, but more importantly he wanted broadband to be affordable. The president correctly pointed out that marketplace competition and consumer choice would spawn greater consumer broadband adoption, ultimately benefiting the entire American economy. This was his policy goal. In reality, the United States has not met either the goal of universal availability or achieved the level of competition necessary to spur adoption rates and achieve the economic and social benefits the president desired. But that hasn't stopped administration officials from declaring victory anyway.Continue reading
On YouTube-Debate Night, America split by a digital divide
It's time for the first of the CNN-YouTube Presidential Debates. It will be broadcast on Youtube http://www.youtube.com/citizentube July 23, 2007. But sadly missing so far in the race that is so dependent on the Internet is any mention of the digital divide.
- Binary America: Split in Two by A Digital Divide, by Jose Antonio Vargas, Washington Post, July 23, 2007; C01.
CHARLESTON, S.C. -- Less than a mile and a half from the Citadel, the site of the Democratic presidential debate tonight, sits Cooper River Courts, a public housing project. Forget the Web. Never mind YouTube, the debate's co-sponsor. Here, owning a computer and getting on the Internet (through DSL or cable or Wi-Fi) is a luxury. ..."At one level, the YouTube debate shows that the Web has really become a centerpiece of American political culture," adds Lee Rainie, director of Pew Internet. "At another level, it also shows that the debate is not for everybody. It's certainly not available to all Americans." That is especially true at Cooper River Courts, where Tiara Reid, 14, in her jeans shorts and pink striped top, runs up and down the complex asking friends if anyone wants to go the library. Finally her mom, Jossie, who works at a deli, drives her and a neighbor's daughter. With school out and without Internet access at home, the library is the only place where she can go on the Web -- for a maximum of two hours a day.Continue reading
A Bill to “bring the government into the same century as its citizens” still on Hold
Here is more on the Freedom of Information Act legislation that is stalled in the Senate. (Earlier story: DOJ objects to FOIA bill, Senate HOLD put on bill) An interesting statistic in this article is that only 6 percent of all FOIA requests come from news media -- most come from private concerns and individuals. The bill in question was on "secret hold" in the Senate until journalists polled Senators and discovered that it was Senator Jon Kyl, Republican of Arizona, who put the hold on the bill. This article also has this quotable comment: "Don't expect a huge uproar if the bill doesn't make it. With an election coming, data secrecy isn't the sexiest issue. But many of those "Holy cow" newspaper articles you read have their roots in the banal bureaucracy of government information."
- Let the Sun Shine, by David Carr, New York Times July 23, 2007
We live in a nakedly transparent age. Celebrities live out loud, companies routinely have their business spilled all over the Web and anybody can find out an awful lot about you or me with a click of the mouse. Not so in Washington, however, where the mechanism for releasing information has all but ground to a halt. ...Almost everyone seems to realize that more sunlight is needed. A bill to bring the government into the same century as its citizens has picked up massive support across a broad spectrum, but has yet to reach the Senate floor for a vote because it is impaled on the obstinacy of a single senator. ...The bills are not intended to open the government kimono any further (this being a very security-conscious age), but simply to make agencies meet the requirements of long-standing mandates.If you can't reach the above link, another copy of the article is here at Media Channel. Continue reading