Library Helping to Lessen the Digital Divide

Throughout this semester, we have talked about the digital divide and how prevalent the problem remains. We have seen citizens turning to their local libraries in search of computer and Internet access. Sewell Chan wrote about how the New York Public Library is trying to lessen the digital divide in his article "Library Expands Wi-Fi Access and Will Lend Laptops" published July 22, 2009.

Chan writes about the New York Public library and their plan to give computer and Internet access to the public. Since 1998, the NYPL’s central building on 5th Avenue has provided a reading room with 50 seats for people to use their lap tops and plug in to Ethernet ports. Because they have so many people vying for Internet access, the library is outfitting another large room with free Wi-Fi access. 128 seats are available in the new Wi-Fi room and the library has 46 laptops that they are going to loan out to patrons.

I think this is a great venture for the NYPL but a few questions come to my mind as I read the article. First of all, how are they going to loan out laptops? Does a customer have to give a drivers license or a credit card to reserve a lap top? How do they control lap top theft? I tried to find answers to this on their website, but did not see anything after a quick search.

I also wonder how much of their budget is allocated to maintain Internet access, Wi-Fi, and lap tops for loans. I am sure that the NYPL has a pretty large budget, but how can the library afford to make this investment in such a hard economic time?

While I think the new Wi-Fi and lap top loan services are great, I am curious about how they are implementing the program. Maybe the NYPL will be a model that other public libraries can look to.

Better World Books

Wednesday, July 22, 2009

Stephanie Elam’s article, Building better world a book at a time, published July 2, 2000 on cnn.com. http://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/worklife/07/01/mainstreet.books/ is a great example of what a little initiative and hard work can do. Elam puts the spotlight on Xavier Helgesen, and his partners, Kreece Fuchs and Jeff Kurtzman, who started the company Better World Books. The trio’s idea for Better World Books started when they were in college, trying to sell back their used textbooks to the university. As we have all surely experienced, the university wouldn’t buy a majority of their books back, so the guys started selling their books on half.com. Soon after, they decided to hold book drives, which were an immediate hit. Their first drive in 2002 collected roughly 2,000 books which were then sold for $20,000. Within a few years, the company branched out from just textbooks to include drives at libraries with every kind of book imaginable.In order to get a little exposure, Helgesen, Fuchs and Kurtzman attended an ALA conference where they proceeded to hear atrocious stories about the libraries they were advertising to. Helgesen talks of libraries that literally dumped books down a well at night because they were unable to shelve or recycle the books.In the seven years since Better World Books has been operating, the founders have managed to expand their warehouse in Mishawka, Indiana to house more than 2 million books. Every day they bring in about 40,000 new books and they now have projected revenue in 2009 of $31 million.Like Amazon, Better World Books offers great prices on everything ranging from picture books to text books. The cheapest books can be as little as $3.50, to $100 text books. Not only does this company offer books at a cheap price, they also do not charge for shipping, and they donate 5 to 10 percent of their revenue to libraries and literacy programs around the world.Better World Books provides a great alternative for libraries that are forced to weed and get rid of books they no longer have room for. Now, consumers have the opportunity to purchase literature that they otherwise might not have been able to. I have had many textbooks that I wasn’t able to sell back, and I wish I would have had an outlet to donate and make use of my old books. Better World Books also does not charge any shipping fees, no matter how many books are ordered, so I would probably use it over sites like Amazon, especially knowing a portion of my proceeds went to help libraries and literacy programs.

Google Book Search a Benefit to All

Mark Gimein’s article, "In Defense of Google Books", published June 23rd at thebigmoney.com, lauds the efforts of Google and its Book Search digitization project. While Gimein’s article is decidedly one-sided and especially hypercritical of Harvard librarian, Robert Darnton, the man who, at times, seems to be single-handedly leading the charge against Google and its efforts, Gimein does raise valid points about why Google’s project is a good thing.

Gimein argues that project opponents such as Darnton (who, by the way, was once one of the project’s most ardent supporters) are making wild, ill-founded claims against Google and its underlying purpose for taking on this project. For example, while Darnton and others claim that “Google Books threatens to develop a stranglehold on human knowledge and use it to gouge consumers,” and “rip off writers and publishers,” they fail to see that, as Gimein argues, Google, thus far, has shown no evidence of any intent to “rip off” the users of any of its products. Furthermore, books that have been abandoned by their publishers and sent to the graveyard of out-of-print books could experience renewed interest from a previously untapped audience. After the latest round of legal battles, Google is required to give authors 63% of the revenue earned from the ads it places in the preview of books in Book Search. Common sense should dictate that an author with an out-of-print book that is not generating any income would be happy to earn 63 cents on every dollar; after all, that’s 63 cents more than they had before. Additionally, as anyone knows, large publishers do not generally pick up unknown authors until an author’s book has a proven record of generating a large income. Therefore, it would seem that if a previously out-of-print book is generating buzz from its inclusion in Google Book Search that a publisher could put the book back in print and generate its own income. This would benefit all involved.

Another issue commonly overlooked in the great Google Book Search debate is that, in the book previews, Google offers links to various retailers along with the price of the text at that location, and even lists a “find it in a library near you” link. I might argue that if anyone in the virtual world has a “stranglehold” on information, it would be Amazon.com. It seems to me that if Google Book Search threatens the vitality and income of anyone, it would be Amazon, since other, possibly lower-cost options would be listed for all to see, along with the ultimate in low-cost book options, the library.

Lastly, while librarians such as Robert Darnton are complaining that libraries should be doing this digitizing themselves and offering access to all (because, as he says in his NYRB essay, libraries are, above all else, “free” and “for all”), no one is stopping them from doing so—they just aren’t doing it. But wait…if Harvard digitized its own collection and offered free access to everyone, then Harvard’s policy that all library users must have a valid Harvard ID or pay an exorbitant fee for limited access to some of its materials would become irrelevant, which could reduce Harvard’s library income and possibly even some of its prestige. (Not to mention that millions of people would then have, in some small way, a Harvard education without the hefty price tag.)

The fact that publishers and major universities are digitizing their own collections, while at the same time railing against Google Book Search and filing legal complaint after legal complaint, is nothing more than big business trying to hedge its bets and ensure that they make profit off authors one way or another, whether it benefits the author or not. After all, if publishers were looking out for authors’ best interests, they’d be paying a whole lot more in royalties and keeping more books in print, right?

Offended? Sue the Library!

West Bend, WI is quite the hotbed of library collection challenges! In an article by ABC News, in the past year, the West Bend Community Memorial Library has had to deal with some very public challenges to its collection. The first challenge of note was from Ginny and Jim Maziarka, founders of the West Bend Citizens for Safe Libraries group. The Maziarkas wanted what they deemed to be sexually explicit/pornographic books to be removed from the Young Adult section of the library, re-labeled, and placed in a restricted area requiring parental consent to view them. The Maziarkas lost their challenge.

The latest challenge by Robert Braun and 3 other individuals, calls for the burning of "Baby Be-Bop," by Francesca Lia Block. Yes, you read that right. He wants the right to burn the book publicly, in an effort to deter the future addition of any offensive materials in the library. Mr. Braun's suit also demands $120,000 in "damages" stemming from simply having the book in the library.

I haven’t read the book. However, after reading several articles about its challenge by Mr. Braun, it’s on my list of must-reads. "Baby Be-Bop", according to Publisher’s Weekly, is a “haunting, lyrical tale of love, faith and self-acceptance”. The book follows a young man’s “coming out” and his quest for self-acceptance and love. After reading over 50 reviews of this book on Amazon.com, I have no doubt that it would be a valuable read for all teens, especially those struggling with their own sexuality.

My first reaction to reading about Mr. Braun’s challenge was to think he has way too much time on his hands. My second reaction was that he has the right to his opinion, but why should his opinion (or anyone else’s) dictate what books remain on library shelves? And really, to demand to have the book burned in front of the library?

I believe Mr. Braun has every right to want the book to be removed and he has the right to express his opinion. However, if this were a valid challenge would he really be asking for $120,000 in “damages”? Exactly what damage is caused by having a book in a library? Can a book grab you and force you to read it? Silly, yes, but no sillier than Mr. Braun’s claim that he deserves $120k for “being exposed” to this book. I’m very much of the “If you don’t like it, don’t read it” ilk. I believe I am responsible for the books my children and I check out of the library. As we’ve discussed in the past few weeks, it is not the library’s job to dictate what a community should read, but rather, it’s the library’s job to provide access to materials.

Do Public Libraries Need Corporate Help?

The local library is one of the most important places for people to gather and find the books they are looking for. Lately the library has come under attack, whether from the transfer of information sources to the Internet or a down economy drying up funds in the budget. In this article from the Oregonian, there is one small town that has found a corporate sponsor. Banks, OR is a tiny former logging town just trying to survive and obviously, Barnes and Noble have the resources to help out. Buy a book, mention you support the library and bam! the library gets a small portion of the book sale. Corporate sponsorship has hit a new high, or some might say a new low, since the days of pro teams and the Olympics being sponsored.

Is it a good idea though? In my opinion yes. I have always been a proponent of the library as the center for post-education learning. Andrew Carnegie started many public libraries across the country and it seems only fitting that in some instances a corporation can step in and help out a little to improve the community in which it resides. Sadly, too many cities and towns, and not a few states, across the country are sorely pressed to meet their fiscal duties and oft times the public library is the easiest target to get the funding axe. By teaming up with a corporation, those same public libraries can get at least some of their funding replaced; maybe even enough to buy much needed computers for job seekers. What a corporate sponsored public library would look like is an unknown, but what is known is that corporations are desperately trying to improve their public image in the face of the current economic meltdown and the good publicity of helping the local library could go a long way.

Obviously there is the potential for the library to be contracted into a bad deal, but sometimes you have to risk the bad contract if you want to save an American institution like the public library from disappearing forever. A lot of small communities out there are in a similar situation to Banks and some may have to close their library as a result. Would it be worth the risk to have an entity like Barnes and Noble come to the rescue of the library? Again, my answer is yes.

Doing Away with Dewy Decimal

The Dewey Decimal System has been a staple, if not a tradition, in the operation of most libraries for decades. Now, as the definition of what a library represents are changing, so are the ways in which librarians are choosing to structure the organization of materials. The Rangeview Library District, in Adams County, Colorado, is an example of this change, as shown in the Library Journal's article, Rangeview Library System, CO, First System to Fully Drop Dewey. As the title suggests, this will be the first library system in the country to eliminate use of the Dewey Decimal System in favor of its own orginizational system called WordThink, which uses Book Industry Services and Communications, or BISAC, subject headings to categorize materials based on general topics, such as history, computers, or fiction, then sorts materials alphabetically by title.

Though the standards of WordThink appear to boast greater convenience by making browsing by subject and title easier for patrons, the Dewey Decimal system employs a universal standard for organization that is not necessarily offered in WordThink. This BISAC-based classification system gives more room for individual interpretation, which may not always be a good thing. Take, for example, the Rangeview Library District versus another Colorado library system, mentioned in the article. Each system adheres to BISAC's categories, but Maricopa does so more strictly, while Rangeview combines certain, similar categories, such as parenting and child rearing, into a single category. Slight changes such as these suggest that there are no general restrictions on classifications, leading to possible inconsistencies in material placement from library to library. This could be potentially confusing to library patrons who go in search of a specific title that their local library does not house, but are unable to find it at another library because it implements an entirely different system to organize its materials.

Another point to consider is the economic implications of the process of changing books from one system to another. The article states that the Rangeview District collection development team "has been working for months to change the records." For libraries with limited financial means, hiring extra staff for several months to make such huge changes may not be within the realm of financial possibility.

While Pam Sandlian Smith, the Rangeview District director, states, "WordThink is just one more example of how Rangeview puts its customers first," the question of whether or not a complete overhaul of an existing classification system is completely necessary to facilitate the needs of library patrons. The Dewey Decimal system has been successfully employed for many years, so why change it now when there is not much call to do so? Outside of convenience, what are the other benefits? With the suggestions that other libraries nationwide are considering the use of BISAC-based organization systems, these are questions that librarians will need to ask themselves.

Core Competencies for ALA-Accredited LIS Programs

As MLIS students we have either asked ourselves or been asked by others why do you need a Masters degree to become a librarian? At first we may not have known the answer to this question but as we continue with our courses the need for an additional degree becomes blatantly clear. Although not everyone in the field of library and information science can agree upon what competencies graduates of LIS programs should have as evident in the Library Journal’s article Task Force’s Recommendations for LIS Accreditation Criticized written by Norman Oder.

The ALA put together a task force for library education to guarantee that LIS programs produced competent and capable graduates who understand the core values of the profession. The task force was asked to produce a report of their final recommendations to ensure that all ALA-accredited LIS programs had the same standards for a ‘core curriculum.’ Once the final report was released the critics of the recommendations emerged.

This article ties into our upcoming readings and discussions on professionalism. I do believe there is a need for some form of standardization for LIS programs but also agree with some of the task force’s critics from the article. I am not sure that a ‘core curriculum’ across the board will work. The deans of iSchools made some good points as to why a ‘core curriculum’ would not work. They stated that we are currently experiencing rapid changes and that LIS students are too diverse to be bound to stagnate standards. Therefore the curriculum must remain flexible to remain updated. It is feared that a set ‘core curriculum’ will not remain relevant over the years and become outdated.

Conversely, it would be nice to graduate knowing that my fellow colleagues with MLIS degrees have the same base knowledge as myself when entering the field. I think either adding to or revising the current ALA Standards for Accreditation of Master's Programs in Library & Information Studies would aide in the professionalism of the field from the beginning of a librarian’s career.

Where's the Love?

Where’s the Love?

http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/article/CA6657608.html

President Obama Freezes School Library Funding in 2010

By Debra Lau Whelan -- School Library Journal, 5/12/2009

Should we fight for more money for the public libraries of this nation? According to this article, the “Improving Literacy Through School Libraries” program funding levels have remained unchanged since 2008. President elect Obama had promised to reward federal programs that succeed. Is keeping funding at the same level a reward? As a current employee of a public school, I daily see time and resources used ineffectively and wastefully as teachers struggle to balance the actual educational needs of their students with the seemingly arbitrary and sometimes conflicting federal standards of the “No Child Left Behind” act. Certainly a well-intentioned act, but as the saying goes the road to not such a pleasant place is paved with them.

What should we do to attain the promised levels of $250 million in 2001 that have never been reached? The 2008 level was $19.1 million.

Should we march on Washington and demand our fair share? In this current economy many would argue that is a futile idea. But is it? Libraries are already inundated with requests from the unemployed for help in their job searches. Youth are hanging out on our porches more frequently with the cancellations of summer schools and programs they used to rely on for downtime education, entertainment, and enlightenment. The under-employed have more time on their hands to take courses. Surely we can use more resources to find resources for them, teach classes on how to find financial aid, how to research colleges and training programs. People need answers, and our public libraries are the places that the populace already knows to go to for answers. Our librarians are trained and ready to assist, sadly they are hampered by shorter hours, budget freezes, and hiring freezes. If we are to get this economy moving again, we need jobs. What better place to throw stimulus funds into than the public library which uses resources far more effectively and to a wider audience at a lower cost than any historical institution.

We have until the end of July, when Congress supposedly will finish up the budget and take their August recess.

Korean National Digital Library

There are exciting things happening in Korean libraries. In The Korea Times article, “Library Going Digital,” B. Ji-sook reports on the opening, the first of its kind in terms of physical space and scope, of the National Digital Library in southern Seoul. Ji-sook writes that this library, with its 380,000 digital books, 116 million pieces of digital content, 626 computers, and 8-story building, “complements” the National Library. I might argue that this is an understatement. In any case, this digital library offers the opportunity for people to come in and access the digital materials, either on one of the library computers, or by accessing the library website on personal or rental computers. The National Digital Library is able to cater to both national and international visitors, and also provides accommodation for disabled people. I think one of the more impressive features of the NDL is found in its collaboration with national, public and academic libraries in Korea and abroad in creating “a huge database.”

In theory I cannot find fault in with the NDL; in reality there are a few concerns that were not addressed in the article, which I think are important, including the general purpose of the NDL (beyond opening "[...]eyes to the world of books" (Mo Chul-min, NDL director)). Granted, this article is for a more general audience and promoting the library to a foreign audience, but I am still full of questions! Chul-min readily admits to a couple of the challenges he feels face the library: copyright issues and e-book competition. I am interested in the library’s philosophy. Obviously, in many cases, it sounds like the NDL offers alot of information and fabulous access. This library will benefit countless people; I can think of a 10 reasons why I would love to use the NDL purely for academic research. Also, the fact that they store important “historical” websites, for example, will make the NDL a valuable library in the future. The questions I have revolve around what is being collected, and more importantly, to what purpose. According the Chul-min, the NDL ‘dibrary’ collects information online that “… will be assessed according to several standards: whether the information can benefit many people; whether it is necessary; and whether it (is)worth saving for a long time.” Again, in theory, this sounds like a reassuring answer.

I am concerned that a digital library of this magnitude, at the national level, is setting an example for other digital collections regarding what information/knowledge is worthwhile. If knowledge equals power, who decides what is beneficial from online sources? Who has the power to choose what is necessary and valuable? I realize that limits must be drawn somewhere, and perhaps the answer is simpler than I expect and can be found in the general collection policies governing a library. I fear, however, that these policies may not have been created with the digital information explosion in mind and may not properly accommodate the massive amounts of information available online. I accept that a national digital library will represent a “national” bias if it has the resources to collect a large amount of information for storage and people are able to access it, but it is disquieting to imagine what is being left out of this collection.

New Programs & Services for a New Era of Needs

Last week, we discussed the different roles that librarians play though Kane’s article “Careers and Environments.” Contrary to what the article Job seekers without Internet access stretch libraries' computers, from "Portland News", describes, I never saw “job counselor” or “resume builder” listed. This article really speaks to the different hats that librarians have to wear to benefit and help their community. As we discussed, the roles of librarians are not always laid out in black and white, but rather range to include tasks of every color imaginable. Excuse the bad metaphor, but I think experienced librarians, especially in the public library sector, would agree that there is no task too big, small, or off the wall and the new programs and events that librarians are putting on for job seekers and technology learners seems to suggest that.

This week we’re discussing “21st Century Literacy @ your library” from the American Library Association (ALA) which describes “helping children and adults develop skills they need to fully participate in an information society—whether it’s learning to read or explore the Internet...” What better way to illustrate how libraries are helping adults with digital literacy than though computer usage, and in our current economy, computer usage to find a job. Libraries all across the county, specifically Portland (Ore.) in this article, are greeting with open arms those who need assistance with basic job searching and everything that comes along with it (creating an e-mail account, searching for jobs, filling out applications, etc.). The only problem is that those open arms seem to only be so big—the need for assistance is overtaking many library resources. One of the librarians quoted in the article expresses her frustration of only having minutes to help each patron. With limited funding and shrinking budgets, libraries are feeling the pain of the economy just as patrons are. It’s a nasty cycle. Not only to mention the drain on library staff resources, but this article is saying that libraries have a limited number of computers to begin with which I’m sure is only becoming more of a challenge as budgets continue to diminish and computer usage steadily increases causing computers to be over-used and eventually damaged.

This article also mentions some of the more specific things libraries are doing for patrons, such as “three-hour job-hunting labs” and basic computer classes in multiple languages such as English, Spanish, Vietnamese, Chinese and Russian. Out of curiosity, I visited the Chicago Public Library’s (CPL) events and programs section of their Web site to see what they had to offer in the month of June. The programs that came up include: Create and E-mail Account; Ask a Career Expert; Sell Yourself in Any Interview; Internet Basics (twice); and Using E-mail Skills to Aid Your Job Search. All of these programs are about job searching or can be used when job searching. I wonder what programs are other libraries offering and if there is any liability or risk to holding such workshops? I can’t imagine that someone would try to hold the library responsible for receiving “resume help” that wasn’t actually helpful, or something of the sort, but stressful times often lead to irrational people…

Another important point that this article touches on is equality of access. Wealthier people are more likely to have the internet in their homes than the less wealthy, and because of the overwhelming need for internet, those without internet in their homes are not able to come to the library and go online to get the information that they need. As we’re shown in “21st Century Literacy @ your library”, the stated mission of the ALA is, “To provide leadership for the development, promotion and improvement of library and information services and the profession of librarianship in order to enhance learning and ensure access to information for all.” The key here is “for all.” If libraries are being overpopulated and those who need information are not being able to access it due to overcrowding, libraries are not able to fulfill their mission. But like I’ve mentioned, it’s a vicious cycle—is there a solution? What are other libraries doing to assist patrons with job hunting needs? Have there been other times in history where libraries played similar roles for different circumstances? These are all just questions I’ve begun to ponder…



*IF the link above does not work, please visit: http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2009/05/job_seekers_without_internet_a.html to view the article. Thanks!

E-Book Piracy and Information Seeking Behavior

Relating to the upcoming week’s reading in The Portable MLIS, specifically the chapter by Donald Case on Information Seeking Behavior, this article http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/12/technology/internet/12digital.html regarding the scanning, dissemination and downloading of pirated books on the web seems especially timely.

The issue is presented in the article in its complexity. Some authors clearly feel that their work is being stolen. Others, like Doctorow, are glad of the publicity and believe that obscurity is a fate worse than copyright infringements. Stephen King clearly has a canny awareness of his target audience; in this case, he implies that those who use pirated material probably wouldn’t be able to prioritize buying one of his steeply-priced new releases into his or her weekly budget.

Of course, some theft is inevitable. To some degree, thieves have always kept one step ahead of those trying to prevent them from stealing. But as Rich argues in the article, the number of cases of book piracy is lately increasing. The reason is not a mystery, according to Rich; new technology and a greater volume of eBook releases have made it easier.

Leading into this phenomenon are several other issues which complicate the matter. From the comments on the article, it is clear that some users consider the costs of using the Kindle to be prohibitive. Others feel that the legitimate purchasers of eBooks are thwarted by overbearing digital rights management controls, which still fail to achieve their goal, which is, presumably, preventing piracy.

Also brought into play is the problem of publishers, who, most people feel, are just happy to overcharge for both hardcover and electronic versions. As Rich states, both authors and publishers are aware of the parallels between the eBook industry and the mp3 industry. It seems to be a clear message to the publishers – if they continue to gouge, people will revolt.

Another issue, which directly relates to the ‘knowledge is power’ axiom, and expressed in the comments by Waltworks and others, is that there is something empowering about taking out the middle man (or woman) and allowing a free-flow of information between the reader and the author. In another parallel to the music industry, and to the manufacture and consumption of popular culture in general, the public may be a little jaded, given that we are force-fed books which are niche-marketed at us by publishers who decide what we, as consumers, will like. To me, it feels a little like an air of populist revolt and perhaps justification that the publishers are getting their comeuppance.

One question which comes to mind is 'Why don’t readers just use their library?'- a point that many of the commentators make. I think Case’s argument partially answers this question. It is less trouble to search online for an illegal copy than it is to physically go to the local library, check something out and have to return it. It appears to support Case’s argument that users would rather have inferior pirated e-versions with errors, than to check out a legitimate copy, because it is the easiest and fastest way to get it. Then again, other reasons may co-exist. They get to keep the book. Forever. Then there is the ever-present problem of demand. When the last Harry Potter book came out, librarians were bracing themselves. Some libraries just cannot cater to the mass hype of hundreds of people wanting to read the same book, all at once.

Many, if not most, libraries now have available some sort of online eBook service as part of basic membership, so why don’t readers access these instead of downloading illegal copies? Could it be lack of technical savvy and online help? Are the books in high demand always checked out? Is DRM limiting access in terms of transferring books to portable devices? Perhaps the eBook collection is limited to non-fiction (as with my local library). Or maybe the readers want a non-fiction textbook, but the collection does not have the specific textbooks that readers need. What seems obvious is that the old system of consuming, publishing, and purchasing books needs an overhaul.

Congressional Research Service

Do the American taxpayers get what they give? This is a key question in my head as I am reading an article from the New York Times titled “Group Seeks Public Access to Congressional Research” American taxpayers are spending approximately $100 million dollars to fund a small division of the Library of Congress named the Congressional Research Service. But the research service, its results, and all documentation there of is solely the property of the members of Congress and their constituents. By law, only members of Congress can change that.
There is a group who is trying to force Congress to give up their precious commodity. The Center for Democracy and Technology run by Ari Schwartz, its COO are trying (and have been for many years now) their dardest to make all of these reports public records. The group has even opened a website Open CRS which places some leaked reports on the web. This group is not the only group trying to get these reports out to the mainstream. Penny Hill Press is the only source for these files. It is run by Walter Seager, his wife, and their son. There is no public source for the abstracts. After the Press spends countless hours getting the reports (about 20 a day) it then sells the results to people in the academic world, politicians, and of course lobbyists. According to the elder Seager, Penny Hill Press will continue to do so until “Congress does the right thing and makes the reports freely available to the public.”
The only known index of the reports is now on Wikileaks, which is a website that posts rare documents online for the public. So far they have posted almost 7000 of the CRS files. They would not disclose how they received the archive. A spokeswoman for the CRS states that their work is solely for the use by Congress and that the law is renewed every year by Congressional committees. A representative from the House Administration Committee compares the CRS documents to memos that are passed around the office and explains that those too are not released to the public. The head of the Senate Rules Committee is currently reviewing the rules in regards to these files.
The truth about this article is that it does not seem like anyone knows what is actually in them. Thus, I think that one of the main reasons that groups like the Center for Democracy and Technology want them released is to see just what these surveys are saying about the American people. There was also a survey that was given out on a political website asking what the people wanted released to them. The CRS surveys were the coup de grace! But I ask myself. What/who would it help? It seems that the only people with enough power to do anything within the legal system already have the access, power, and money to obtain these materials. Having such documents made public might not help it in any way. But I do not think that it matters.
I was very surprised by this article as I (and I am assuming many, many others) had no idea what was happening. What does this mean to the US taxpayer? I believe that because the money comes from the public, they should get a say what happens to these files. But on the other hand, US taxpayer money also goes to things like the military and the public definitely does not get a say. In Ranganathan’s text that the class is reading there was a quote in it that said that “no personal preference shall have undue influence”. Is not the opinion and values of individual Congress people affecting what kinds of documents the public can read? If this happened in a library, a librarian not wanting a small child to read something mature, the librarian should still give that child the CHOICE to read it. The FREEDOM to see results of surveys. Congress is there to fight for our small freedoms, and they should start with the documents on their desks.