EPA halts library closures – 1st Amendment Center

Courtney Holliday from the First Amendment Center reports that the Environmental Protection Agency is halting its library closures plan "in response to heavy criticism from lawmakers and advocacy groups":

"Under pressure from members of Congress and groups such as the ALA, the EPA announced in January that it would not close additional libraries until more public outreach was done, according to the Library Journal."
So it's not over yet, per se. Continue reading

Continue Reading →

House Rules limit members’ use of the web

The latest in a series of Op-Eds in The Hill addresses how antiquated "Franking" rules, which govern how members of the House of Representatives can use paper mail, adversely affect their use of the web for communicating with constituents.

...most member websites function as little more than online brochures, when they could better serve as a place to share information about the member's activities in Congress, or even as a vital community center. Under these rules, members cannot use Google maps to provide visuals for district information important to constituents. Neither can members use non-congressionally provided blogging tools, nor link to other blogs that may be deemed to be of a political nature.

This is one of a series of Op-Eds written by contributors to the OpenHouse Project's recent report on congressional information. The complete report is available as a pdf document: Congressional Information & the Internet (The OpenHouse Project, May 8, 2007). The earlier Op-Eds are:

Continue reading

Continue Reading →

GAO: Some federal scientists feel hemmed in by policies

The General Accountability Office was recently asked to look into whether federal scientists were being muzzled into media silence. They produced the report: Federal Research: Policies Guiding the Dissemination of Scientific Research from Selected Agencies Should Be Clarified and Better Communicated, GAO-07-653, May 17, 2007 Here is the abstract for your consideration (emphasis mine):

Researchers at federal agencies disseminate their research results through a variety of approaches, including scientific publications, presentations, press releases, and media interviews. Because of recent concerns about some federal researchers possibly being restricted from disseminating their research on controversial topics, GAO determined (1) the policies that guide the dissemination of federal research at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA); (2) how effectively these agencies have communicated their policies to researchers; and (3) the extent to which researchers have been restricted in disseminating their research. GAO conducted a survey of 1,811 researchers randomly selected at the three agencies, and had a 66 percent response rate. Most of the NASA, NIST, and NOAA policies that guide the dissemination of federally funded research generally facilitate the dissemination process, but some do not. GAO found that overall NASA's policies, including its recently revised media policy, are clear and should help facilitate dissemination regardless of the dissemination approach used. At NIST and NOAA, GAO found that the agencies' policies for dissemination through publications and presentations were generally clear and should facilitate dissemination; but their policies for disseminating research through media interviews and press releases may hinder it. For example, because both NIST and NOAA are part of Commerce, researchers at these agencies must comply with department-level policies to disseminate their research results through media interviews or press releases, but Commerce's policies are outdated and can prevent researchers from meeting media schedules. Moreover, requests by NOAA researchers to share their research via media interviews and press releases may be further hampered because these researchers must also comply with their own agency's media interview and press release policies in addition to the Department of Commerce's. NOAA officials told GAO that because its media interview and press release policies lack clarity, they have been inconsistently interpreted by NOAA public affairs officials. According to GAO's survey, NASA, NIST, and NOAA have made efforts to communicate their dissemination policies to their research staff, but many researchers are not confident that they know how to comply with some of the policies. The agencies have communicated their dissemination policies through staff meetings, on agency Web sites, and in limited formal training. While 90 percent of researchers are confident that they understand the policies for publications, only about 65 percent are confident they understand their agency's media interview and press release policies well enough to comply with them. Similarly, almost half of the researchers across the agencies are unsure whether their agency's policy allows them to discuss their personal views on the policy implications of their research. Finally, only 25 percent of researchers across the agencies are aware of a process to follow to appeal denials of requests to disseminate their research. On the basis of responses to GAO's survey, 6 percent--or about 200 researchers--across NASA, NIST, and NOAA had dissemination requests denied during the last 5 years. One of the most common reasons researchers mentioned for these denials was that the topic of the research was sensitive or restricted for security reasons; in some cases, no reason was given. Most researchers at these agencies believe that their agency is more supportive of dissemination of research through publications and presentations, than dissemination through the media. Most NIST and NOAA researchers believe that their agency consistently applies the dissemination policies for each route of dissemination, while more researchers at NASA believe the agency consistently applies its policies for publications than believe the agency consistently applies its policies for press releases and interviews.
The full report is available at the link above. Continue reading

Continue Reading →

When one copy is not enough…

When the University of Illinois Library joined others in the Google Book Search Library Project, one thing the librarians there knew was that relying on a single digital repository would not fit their preservation or access needs.

The libraries are taking a long-term view on the preservation and availability of the newly digitized materials, too. Rather than leaving the storage to Google alone, as some partners have done, they're creating at least one, and probably two, shared digital repositories of their own to archive and manage the information and content to be added in the future. The idea is that if Google disappears, or changes its business, the information will remain accessible with no hassles. "We know we'll be here," Sandler [Mark Sandler, the director of the committee's Center for Library Initiatives] said.
See: Google partnership will help preserve UI collection, by Greg Kline, The [Champaign-Urbana and East Central Illinois] News-Gazette, Sunday, June 17, 2007. Continue reading

Continue Reading →

Who controls content on government web sites?

Who posts to government web sites? Is the content of government websites driven by service to the customers, citizens, and industry groups or do they reflect a a political message shaped by the agency political appointees? This paper, from the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, IL, September 2004, addresses some of those questions. It has been online for subscribers for a while, but is in print now.

Abstract While much research has focused on the new opportunities that government Web sites offer for greater citizen involvement and improved agency efficiency, less attention has been given to agency decisions about what to post on these Web sites. Here we use interviews with content managers in seven federal agencies to investigate the political and institutional influences behind decisions about Web content. We analyze the approval processes for new content and the emerging governance structures for evidence of greater centralization and political control or greater decentralization and autonomy for Web posters. In the end, it appears that institutional factors persist to influence content governance.
See Also: Who decides what is available and what is withdrawn? Continue reading

Continue Reading →

Archives

Powered by WordPress / Academica WordPress Theme by WPZOOM