"Libraries Enter the Digital Age." Talk of the Nation. NPR. May 11, 2007.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10136882
In this interview from NPR with Ira Flatow some key figures in the world of book digitization were interviewed: Michael S. Hart, Brewster Kahle, and Michael Keller. Michael S. Hart is part of the Gutenberg Project which is a volunteer based program that has transformed over one hundred thousand books into eBooks. Brewster Kahle is the director of the Internet Archive he has worked with the Gutenberg Project and mostly deals with books that have fallen outside of copyright laws and books that have been abandoned (orphan books). Michael Keller is part of the Google effort but does a lot of side projects. The discussion mainly focused on the issues concerning digital information and the future of libraries. A book can be digitized for about $30, which isn't that expensive, on the other hand Hart is part of a project that digitizes all kinds of information for free through the help of many, many volunteers. Either way it is clear that price is not an issue. The digitization of books is great news for libraries because it means a wider audience is able to access the information that is relevant to their questions. A big problem with this is copyright laws. Google is facing many lawsuits for digitizing books that are still within their copyright. Other organizations (like Hart's and some of Kahle's side projects) focus primarily on texts that have fallen out of the copyright. Unfortunately copyright laws are being more and more of an issue because they keep getting extended. Many of the people on this program expressed concerns for a future where everything is copyrighted permanently.
I really enjoyed listening to this interview. One of my favorite parts was something Brewster Kahle said when asked what this whole project is about. He said, "the dream is universal access to all knowledge." What a great dream! Keller made a great point toward the end about those who publish their works (blog, draw, etc.): "All those who create content should allow that content to be thoroughly indexed. And the active indexing of that content should not be a criminal act." I agree with Keller and Kahle about the importance of access to information and the role both parties (the creator and the receiver) must take to insure that access.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Thursday, September 17, 2009
I'll give it a B+
Wikipedia is a site struggling to gain credibility when its very nature is hopelessly erroneous. Brock Read's article "Can Wikipedia Ever Make the Grade?" highlights the main points of Wikipedia's history from its conception to its current fight for accuracy and acceptance amongst scholars. There have been a lot of complaints against Wikipedia's methods of obtaining information and the absence of a serious scholarly review board. Brock outlines some of the more epic mistakes of Wikipedia and why such mistakes occur. While there are teams of people checking pages for errors all the time there are some pages that do not get checked for months. Such was the case for John Seigenthaler Sr. whose article on Wikipedia contained some very false information about his involvement in the Kennedy assassination (he wasn't involved at all). Other problems the site faces is its lack of stability. "Someone can cite Wikipedia, but there is no guarantee that the entry will remain the same over time," how can Wikipedia hope to be used in an academic setting if it cannot be cited or cannot assure the information found on a page one day will not be there the next day?
I was surprised to hear a lot of the facts Read presented in this article. The fact that there have been studies about Wikipedia was really interesting to me. Everybody jokes about Wikipedia but really it isn't too bad of a place to find information. All I know is that when I find something from Wikipedia I always check to see if it is anywhere else before trusting it. Personally, I use Wikipedia as a place to find general information about a topic that I know nothing about, scanning a page for basic details that will help me understand what to look for elsewhere.
I was surprised to hear a lot of the facts Read presented in this article. The fact that there have been studies about Wikipedia was really interesting to me. Everybody jokes about Wikipedia but really it isn't too bad of a place to find information. All I know is that when I find something from Wikipedia I always check to see if it is anywhere else before trusting it. Personally, I use Wikipedia as a place to find general information about a topic that I know nothing about, scanning a page for basic details that will help me understand what to look for elsewhere.
Sunday, September 6, 2009
A library is not a daycare center
"A Library's Approach to Books That Offend"
Alison Leigh Cowan
August 19, 2009
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/19/a-librarys-approach-to-books-that-offend
In today's politically correct world libraries are seeing an increase in complaints about books deemed inappropriate by concerned parents. All libraries have ways for patrons to express their qualms concerning questionable content, and while it is important that these voices be heard it is also important for librarians to do all they can to keep books in the library. There are many ways to acknowledge legitimate complaints and still house them in the library, for example: a change in shelving, moving the book to a harder to access area, or possible revisions (as was the case for Herge's "Tintin.") As Alice Knapp says, "You do walk a fine line, making sure your materials are accessible, while being respectful of community standards." Knapp was the president of the Connecticut Library Association where she had to handle many such complaints. The secret of how to accept a complaint about a book and avoid censorship is an art most librarians know by heart: simply explain, politely, the library's policies about complaints and objectionable subject matter. Often times a patron wishes only to be heard -to send his/her complaint out into the world and be on their way; unfortunately, this technique does not always work.
Reading this article helped me understand what a difficult job librarians have, having to speak up for books and other information which some people find horrifically offending. There were some books named in the article as being challenged that surprised me a lot, specifically "Eloise in Paris" by Kay Thompson and "Looking for Alaska" by John Green. How people have come together with the intention of removing these books from their children is a little disturbing. It is one thing to not allow your own child to not read a certain type of book but to then assume that all other children are not capable of dealing with say, depictions of art from the Louvre with images of naked people ("Eloise in Paris") is ridiculous. A library is not a daycare center and I don't think its contents should be catering to the perceived innocence of today's youth. Information is not inherently dangerous. If a parent doesn't want their child to read a book that deals seriously with the issues of death and adolescence ("Looking for Alaska") then that is something they need to communicate to their child, not to the library.
Alison Leigh Cowan
August 19, 2009
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/19/a-librarys-approach-to-books-that-offend
In today's politically correct world libraries are seeing an increase in complaints about books deemed inappropriate by concerned parents. All libraries have ways for patrons to express their qualms concerning questionable content, and while it is important that these voices be heard it is also important for librarians to do all they can to keep books in the library. There are many ways to acknowledge legitimate complaints and still house them in the library, for example: a change in shelving, moving the book to a harder to access area, or possible revisions (as was the case for Herge's "Tintin.") As Alice Knapp says, "You do walk a fine line, making sure your materials are accessible, while being respectful of community standards." Knapp was the president of the Connecticut Library Association where she had to handle many such complaints. The secret of how to accept a complaint about a book and avoid censorship is an art most librarians know by heart: simply explain, politely, the library's policies about complaints and objectionable subject matter. Often times a patron wishes only to be heard -to send his/her complaint out into the world and be on their way; unfortunately, this technique does not always work.
Reading this article helped me understand what a difficult job librarians have, having to speak up for books and other information which some people find horrifically offending. There were some books named in the article as being challenged that surprised me a lot, specifically "Eloise in Paris" by Kay Thompson and "Looking for Alaska" by John Green. How people have come together with the intention of removing these books from their children is a little disturbing. It is one thing to not allow your own child to not read a certain type of book but to then assume that all other children are not capable of dealing with say, depictions of art from the Louvre with images of naked people ("Eloise in Paris") is ridiculous. A library is not a daycare center and I don't think its contents should be catering to the perceived innocence of today's youth. Information is not inherently dangerous. If a parent doesn't want their child to read a book that deals seriously with the issues of death and adolescence ("Looking for Alaska") then that is something they need to communicate to their child, not to the library.
In Response to the Piper reading
There is no doubt that Internet disinformation is becoming a big problem in today's web-based world. Piper has provided a great resource for distinguishing honest websites from hoaxes and counterfeit sites. I find the very idea of sites like martinlutherking.org appalling and distasteful. A big problem I have noticed is the general ignorance of the way sites are formed and maintained, once a person is informed it is so much easier to distinguish the bad sites from the good sites. Luckily there are sites like register.com that can help people on their search for accurate information.
While these false sites do cause a lot of problems for people they are also a great source of fun and entertainment. There are a lot of very funny sites created in collaboration with different forums meant for entertainment. One of the great things about the Internet is how easily it can transform if you know how to use it. April Fool’s Day on the Internet is so much fun! Almost every major forum puts up false homepages or false stories. Of course, a lot of people may be unaware of this kind of Internet culture which is dangerous in terms of what they then believe to be true. A great example of this is the year-round website for Onion News. Onion News is solely dedicated to providing false news in a convincing and entertaining way. Recently a lot of actual news sites (CNN, ABC, NBC, etc.) have been citing stories from the Onion unaware that it is a hoax website and almost always completely false. Perhaps they should read Piper's fine assessment of such "Web Hoaxes, Counterfeit Sites, and Other Spurious Information on the Internet."
While these false sites do cause a lot of problems for people they are also a great source of fun and entertainment. There are a lot of very funny sites created in collaboration with different forums meant for entertainment. One of the great things about the Internet is how easily it can transform if you know how to use it. April Fool’s Day on the Internet is so much fun! Almost every major forum puts up false homepages or false stories. Of course, a lot of people may be unaware of this kind of Internet culture which is dangerous in terms of what they then believe to be true. A great example of this is the year-round website for Onion News. Onion News is solely dedicated to providing false news in a convincing and entertaining way. Recently a lot of actual news sites (CNN, ABC, NBC, etc.) have been citing stories from the Onion unaware that it is a hoax website and almost always completely false. Perhaps they should read Piper's fine assessment of such "Web Hoaxes, Counterfeit Sites, and Other Spurious Information on the Internet."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
