Lots of follow-ups

  • In case you’ve missed the reference in the comments (or the discussions on listservs), some of our records management colleagues have come up with their own Records Manager’s 2.0 Manifesto. Naturally, they’re having some interesting conversations about it on their blogs as well, so that might be worth some of your precious blog-reading time. (And if you weren’t reading this blog last summer, you might want to go back and take a look at the discussion we had here when I posted “An Archivist’s 2.0 Manifesto“.)
  • You really should go and read Peter Hirtle’s post on the Library Law Blog, “Ancestry’s grants to archives: A good deal?“. He raises some issues you might want to consider before you go to the trouble of applying for one of these grants.
  • You probably missed it, but Max Evans posted a comment letting people know that he has posted the slides from his presentation on the SAA website. And I believe he’s not the only one. If there were sessions that you were interested in (maybe even some of the ones I wrote about it “Finding 2.0-Related Sessions at the SAA Annual Meeting!“), I encourage you to go to the SAA site for the meeting and check out what new information has been added.
  • If you haven’t already discovered AASLH’s blog, you’ve got an excellent excuse to check it out: their recent post, “Are History Organizations Responding Responsibly to the National Economic Crisis?“.
  • If you’re actually reading this on the site, you’ll see that there’s a new poll question up, “Why are you an Archivist?” that collects information on the career track that led people to their current positions. Hope you’ll participate.
  • And, on the “fun stuff” front, you might enjoy taking a look at the Poladroid Project‘s site which allows you to upload a digital image and then convert it into a something resembling an old-school Polaroid. I haven’t tried it yet myself, but it looks like it could produce some cool results.
    Be Sociable, Share!
  • 1 thought on “Lots of follow-ups”

    1. Hi Kate, I have been finding the Archives 2.0 issues really interesting and am somewhat surprised of the lack of literature about it – but I have some theories as to why. 🙂 The first one is that ‘digital issues’ (or the digital crisis – which ever suits) tends to overshadow everything. Archivists and record keepers have yet to effectively grapple with the digital issue in their institutions – the theory is there, and the issues have been aired (although not all I believe), but working it into practice takes time – who has time for additional work with Web 2.0 tools on top of that? I think the general idea is that Digital = access, regardless of how.

      I have also been thinking about Libraries and Archives and Web 2.0 and the difference between how Archives use tools and Libraries use tools. Libraries to me are all about teaching and providing access through teaching and learning. Web 2.0 tools are perfect as they are the ‘vernacular’ of this current moment in time – particularly in University Libraries. However Archives to me are more about providing (appropriate) access to materials. So Web 2.0 tools would have inherently different applications.

      University Archives, who are often attached or umbrella-ed in some way under a LIS policy are more than likely influenced by the practices of the Libraries and would be directly influenced by funding decisions or any ‘push’ by a university towards a particular image.

      I believe the role of the Archivist as passive protector or guardian influences how access is seen and undertaken. I think that the complexity of access issues also influences the motive for wanting to provide access – particularly in business or corporate archives. I wonder how many special collections archives are out there in relation to business or government archives – this would influence what is being said about access and tools – to a certain degree.

      My research is also looking at Web 2.0 for Archives, but from a slightly different perspective. My Masters research asks the question not of how Archivists use Web 2.0 tools, but how the use of those tools by anyone can contribute to our Archival collections. Being only a beginner Archivist myself, I am interested in how Archives approach the idea what I perceive to be heavily contextual records, such as those found in online social networks. So my questions about Archives 2.0 is that if Archives are going to use Web 2.0 tools to help describe their collections, or to allow users to mash up content, then what will happen to the new context? Does it become part of the record? How does it become part of the record?

      What a long comment! I really enjoy reading your blog cos it helps me think about my own research – thanks!

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *