Archivist to intelligence agencies: stop reclassifying information!
Archivist Urges U.S. to Reopen Classified Files" By SCOTT SHANE Published: March 3, 2006 This is an update of a story previously posted on FGI about reclassification of govt documents. Allen Weinstein, the Archivist of the US, called on the intelligence agencies to stop "removing previously declassified historical documents from public access." Matthew Aid, the historian who first blew the whistle on this reclassification program, writes an in-depth account at the National Security Archive, including links to many of the documents and various news stories and editorials surrounding the story.
Allen Weinstein, the nation's chief archivist, announced what he called a "moratorium" on reclassification of documents until an audit can be completed to determine which records should be secret. A group of historians recently found that decades-old documents that they had photocopied years ago and that appeared to have little sensitivity had disappeared from the open files. They learned that in a program operated in secrecy since 1999, intelligence and security agencies had removed more than 55,000 pages that agency officials believed had been wrongly declassified.Continue reading
Citizen groups fight back against government secrecy
Web availability of government information continues to be a mixed blessing. With so much information so easily available to so many people, access in many ways can be considered much improved. But with GPO's refusal to deposit digital government information in depository libraries, more information can be withdrawn without public notice. A new article in FCW reports on the issues:
Public interest groups and federal officials agree on one thing: Because of homeland security concerns, information that was once readily available on public Web sites has steadily disappeared in recent years. But the agreement ends there.Includes a sidebar "Disenfranchising GPO" that describes how agencies have taken control of their information and are publishing it online without notifying GPO. Continue reading
Total Information Awareness just changed its name
TIA Lives On, By Shane Harris, National Journal, Feb. 23, 2006.
A controversial counter-terrorism program, which lawmakers halted more than two years ago amid outcries from privacy advocates, was stopped in name only and has quietly continued within the intelligence agency now fending off charges that it has violated the privacy of U.S. citizens.See also:
- Tinker, Tailor, Miner, Spy: Why the NSA's snooping is unprecedented in scale and scope, By Shane Harris and Tim Naftali, Slate, Jan. 3, 2006.
- Democrats and Bush Aides Spar in Senate Over U.S. Spying, By Scott Shane, New York Times, February 2, 2006.
NARA.google.com
That's not the real url, but, through a partnership with google, NARA has made accessible 101 historic digitized videos. NARA selected films on three topics that bring in high numbers of questions from researchers and the public. The videos include:
- 60 World War II Newsreels (1942-1946)
- 23 National and state parks features (1933-circa 1970)
- 17 Space flight history films by National Aeronautics and Space Administration (1962-1981)
Google Video product manager Peter Chane said the company is working in stages to put as many as possible of the National Archives' 114,000 film reels and 37,000 videos online. "This is a tremendous resource of history and knowledge, and we want to expose that to viewers worldwide," Chane said. The digitization of long-unseen archival footage has been under way for years, but Google's nonexclusive deal with the National Archives will likely provide a vast, new swath of material for history buffs, educators and filmmakers. All of the material is in the public domain, Chane said. That means it can be used or shown elsewhere without paying copyright holders.Continue reading
mmmm, historical statistics!
A Book for People Who Love Numbers, Sam Roberts, NY Times, February 22, 2006. The Historical Statistics of the United States, Millenial edition is due out this spring. I guess I'm that certain personality type because I just wish that I had $825 to plunk down on this 5 volume set -- $5000+ if you want perpetual digital access! This is an invaluable resource for any reference collection. I wonder though, why the Census Bureau authorized the privatized edition to be published by Cambridge University Press? In addition, call me naive, but I wonder why Richard Sutch and Susan Carter, the editors in chief from UC Riverside, would need to spend more than 1/2 their time over the last 11 years in fund-raising for the project? Thoughts? Continue reading