UC berkeley bloggers, BOTM for June, 2007

Jim Church is the International and Foreign Documents Librarian and Librarian for Development Economics at the University of California Berkeley. He began his career with international documents as the UN and European Union Collection Assistant at Princeton University, later serving for one year as Economics Librarian at Yale University, and four years as State, Local and International Documents Librarian at the University of California, San Diego. Jim served for one year as the international documents column editor for the Journal of Government Information. He is currently the International Documents Columnist for Government Documents Roundtable (GODORT) Journal DttP, and an international documents panel judge for the GODORT notable documents panel. Harrison Dekker is currently the Coordinator of Data Services for the Doe/Moffitt Libraries at UC Berkeley. In addition to providing data services, he is actively involved in broader library technology initiatives. Prior to his arrival at Berkeley, Harrison worked as a programmer analyst for a Chapel Hill-based management consulting firm and for the North Carolina State Data Center. His library experience includes stints with the State Library of North Carolina, IBM, and the University of North Carolina. Tim Dennis, a recent graduate of Berkeley's School of Information with over 10 years of experience in research libraries, specializes in user services technology support for the UC Berkeley Government Information unit. He has extensive experience in government information reference services, statistical/data services consultation, and documents processing. Recent activities include: creation of the library's first informational weblog, GovBlog, the IM reference service, GovChat, the unit's Government Information wiki, and is currently leading the unit in a user-centered redesign of the website. Glenn Gillespie is a Reference and Government Information Specialist in Doe/Moffitt Reference Services Department. His primary responsibilities are three-fold. He has oversight of documents operations, provides technical support and is responsible for post-cataloging processing of all material coming into or going out of the Government Reference collection. Glenn devotes a significant portion of his time to reference service through regular duty at Doe and Moffitt Reference desks. Glenn possesses substantial reference experience, with significant knowledge of congressional and federal resources and publications. Susana Hinojosa is currently the UC Berkeley selector for California/US State, and Latin American government publications. In addition to the government documents collection development, Susana's responsibilities and areas of expertise include reference/research and instructional services. She is an active participant in the Government Document unit's development of innovative services which include chat reference, email reference and a GovBlog. From October 2004 through May 2006, Susana was also the primary selector for the library's Spanish and Portuguese collection. Jesse Silva is currently the Federal Documents and Political Science Librarian at Berkeley. Originally from the Los Angeles area, Jesse traded the smog for the redwood trees of UC Santa Cruz where he earned a BA in Community Studies. While working in the University Library, he discovered government documents and a twisted love affair was born. Soon he entered the MLIS program at San Jose State, moved to San Francisco, and took a job cataloging government documents at the SJSU/San Jose Public joint-library. He did this at the same time he co-authored a book on legal executions in California. After a very brief job with Innovative Interfaces (which had nothing to do with gov docs and everything to do with teaching libraries how to use the Innovative software), Jesse is very excited to be working with and learning from the library staff at Berkeley. When he is not in the library, you can find Jesse enjoying everything about living in the San Francisco Bay Area. Continue reading

Continue Reading →

Turkle on Privacy

I'm always struck when I hear people say that privacy doesn't matter anymore and that "we're all being observed all the time anyway, so who needs privacy?" and "As long as I'm not doing anything wrong, who cares who's watching me?" I believe privacy does matter and that it is very important and that libraries have an essential role in ensuring privacy.

Sherry Turkle, sociologist, psychologist, professor at MIT, and author of Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet and How Computers Change the Way We Think (Chronicle of Higher Education, January 30, 2004), addresses this very issue of privacy in her fascinating new article in Forbes:

Here is a sample:

When the question of illegal eavesdropping came up, a common reaction among the gathered Weberati was to turn the issue into a nonissue. We heard, "All information is good information" and "Information wants to be free" and "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." At a pre-awards cocktail party one Web luminary spoke animatedly about Michel Foucault's idea of the panopticon, an architectural structure of spokes of a wheel built out from a hub, used as a metaphor for how the modern state disciplines its citizens.... By analogy, said my conversation partner ... on the Internet someone might always be watching; it doesn't matter if from time to time someone is. Foucault's discussion of the panopticon had been a critical take on disciplinary society. Here it had become a justification for the U.S. government to spy on its citizens. All around me there were nods of assent. High school and college students give up their privacy on MySpace about everything from musical preferences to sexual hang-ups. They are not likely to be troubled by an anonymous government agency knowing whom they call or what Web sites they frequent. People become gratified by a certain public exposure; it is more validation than violation.

Thanks to Library Juice!

See also:

Continue reading

Continue Reading →

DOJ Foreign lobbyists database

According to the NY Times, the US Department of Justice has just released their Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) database. The Foreign Agents Registration Act (22 USC 611) requires people who are under foreign control to register with the Department of Justice before swaying public opinion. The Sunlight Foundation has some evaluation of the database. FARA would like feedback so please try it out and let them know what you think of the database.

Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) was enacted in 1938. FARA is a disclosure statute that requires persons acting as agents of foreign principals in a political or quasi-political capacity to make periodic public disclosure of their relationship with the foreign principal, as well as activities, receipts and disbursements in support of those activities.
Continue reading

Continue Reading →

Digitization Diva: Web 2.0 for Government Libraries

Check out Digitization Diva at http://digitizationdiva.blogspot.com. According to blogger Christy Allen, a librarian at the North Carolina State Library, this blog "focuses primarily on the topics of digitization and Web 2.0 in a government library setting." Recent posts have included a write up of a Best Practices Exchange 2007 session on Web 2.0 in State libraries that I wasn't able to attend and a listing of some interesting looking image collections and how they were promoting themselves via web 2.0 technologies. Continue reading

Continue Reading →

Social Psychology for Librarians

I've been reading a textbook called Social Psychology by Thomas Gilovich, et al and looking at its companion website. I wanted to share some ideas from the book that I think will be of real use to librarians and other government information professionals trying to persuade people to take action to ensure access, preservation and privacy with respect to government information. It may also be of use to people trying to raise awareness and usage of government information, library websites and libraries. So often activists put out calls to action that either seemingly fall on deaf ears or make people aware of issues without taking action. Why is this? It could be because of the way people tend to change their attitudes. In chapter 7 of Social Psychology, we are told that people are open to persuasion on two levels -- a central route and a peripheral route. The central route of persuasion is what is most familiar to us -- "People attend carefully to the message, and they consider relevant evidence and underlying logic in detail." Speaking for myself here, this is the way I tend to try and convince others. I attempt to lay out the evidence to convince people of my point of view or to understand why I think something is under threat. I use statistics when I can and logical-sounding thought experiments when I don't have statistics. If you look at campaigns to increase library use or use of library-purchased electronic resources, I think you see a similar pattern -- "You should use the library because we have x and y and you'll save time and money." But it turns out that people only use the central route under certain conditions -- "when the message is relevant to them, when they have knowledge in the domain, and when the message evokes a sense of personal responsibility." What happens when people don't feel like a message is relevant, when they don't have a lot of knowledge in a particular area and/or they feel no personal responsibility? They take the peripheral route of persuasion -- "people attend to superficial aspects of the message. They use this route when they have little motivation or time or ability to attend to its deeper meaning. In this route, people are persuaded by source characteristics (such as attractiveness and credibility of the communicator) and message characteristics (such as how many arguments there are and whether the conclusions are explicit)" Looking that two two methods of persuasion in detail, I see immediate problems in the efforts of librarians in general and documents librarians in particular to get people to care and be good stewards of our resources. I'd like to outline these problems specifically for those helping to stimulate the building of local digital collections and invite librarians in other disciplines to see how these different routes might explain disconnects with their audiences. I believe that I and others in the "digital deposit" movement have been obsessing over crafting ever better "central route" messages without realizing that much of our core audience (other documents librarians and other government information users) are in fact at the peripheral level though no fault of their own. Let's look at the "central route" factors again:

  1. Relevance to audience;
  2. Audience has knowledge in the domain;
  3. Audience has sense of personal responsibility.
Relevance -- This factor could go either way. Docs librarians understand a message of digital deposit is relevant to them because it is about government information or it's not relevant because the word "digital" makes it an IT concern and not theirs. Knowledge -- While documents librarians have tremendous knowledge of government information products and fine knowledge of how to use Internet-based products, general IT skills and knowledge of local/remote repository options (LOCKSS, dSpace, OAIS, etc) is low. We at FGI have heard from people concerned about the problem, but have no idea what to do and aren't sure where to look for answers. Personal Responsibility -- My personal sense is that this area is the greatest challenge to any "central route" approach of persuading depository librarians to build the geographically distributed depository system of the future. Although the Government Printing Office (GPO) has zero track record in preserving government information over the long haul and in fact no onsite collection at all until very recently, it now proposes to be the sole preserver of federal government information through its Future Digital System. Since this public commitment seemingly absolves libraries of their traditional preservation responsibilities, a majority of our documents colleagues say "GPO's got it covered, why do I need a local collection. Their problem, not mine." And so any message based on library responsibility to preserve materials regardless of format gets tuned out. Obviously I wouldn't be blogging about this if I thought the correct course of action in light of the above was to throw in the towel, go home and kick back with some Alaskan Amber and a good salmon dish. So, what do we do if we are librarians either interested in getting our colleagues to build locally-housed, but Internet shared digital document collections or if we're trying to educate the larger public about the availability of government information, specialists willing and able to help them (librarians), and the need to protect both? As I see it, I think it's using the peripheral route to convince people that government information is relevant to them and they've got responsibility for its continued availability. We also need to provide clear direction as to HOW people can use government information AND keep it available for the future. Once we've done that and people have relevance, knowledge and responsibility, we can go back to the "central route" arguments to solidify our gains. But how to use the peripheral route? Let's look at its characteristics again: "people are persuaded by source characteristics (such as attractiveness and credibility of the communicator) and message characteristics (such as how many arguments there are and whether the conclusions are explicit)" So perhaps we can hire Antonio Banderas and Catherine Zeta-Jones to be spokespersons for government documents. :-) Or perhaps we should focus on credibility of the communicator and message characteristics. Perhaps we could lobby ALA or other library organizations to come out in favor of local digital collections, or at least provide an information clearinghouse on the subject. If we as "digital deposit" advocates can get our message out through existing organizations, their credibility might help the cause. In the case of depository libraries advancing their case, they might try to get a prominent citizen or some other respected person to publicly talk about the value of federal depository libraries. In terms of message characteristics, researchers have found that short messages combined with instructions have helped increase a desired action. For example in 1967, Leventhal, Watts, & Pagano found that people who watched a film about smoking dangers AND were given smoking cessation tips smoked only a third as much as people who where just given tips or who just saw the film. Part of the short messages should be stories, sort of like the ones we've been trying to collect under our Depository Success Stories, stories about libraries being collected by ALA, or even just blogging about how we answered a question on average tariff levels. Lobbyists have been trying to get us to be storytellers for years. Social psychologists have understood the power of persuasion for so long, they even have a name for it -- the indentifiable victim effect. The other part of our message should be about what librarians and other people can actually DO. Here at FGI we've tried to answer part of that question at least implicitly by having pages about remixing government information, blogs of government documents librarians, and resources for capturing digital resources and producing video clips promoting resources. Any ideas about how we put this all together? Get GODORT to hire attractive people to put together a YouTube series called This Old Depository where we give step by step instructions on building your very own globally accessible local digital collection? Let's all think about it together and start a new season of persuasion. Continue reading

Continue Reading →

Archives

Powered by WordPress / Academica WordPress Theme by WPZOOM