The University of Minnesota Libraries has taken a new approach to its planning process this year to help deal with seemingly conflicting realities. On the one hand, everything said publicly by University administration indicates that the U's financial future is Not Good. On the other, the Libraries has several projects in place that are innovative and many, many more on hold that would also be fabulous. These projects are in addition to the regular day-to-day work of a library. Something has to give somewhere, but the Libraries can't just metaphorically throw its hands in the air and say "the heck with this, I'm out".

So, the Libraries is hosting a speaker series with the goal of moving from lemons to lemonade. There have been two speakers so far - Lorcan Dempsey and Paul Courant. See https://wiki.lib.umn.edu/Staff/UniversityLibrariesSpeakerSeries for more information - future speakers will be Jim Neal and Clifford Lynch. While online access is limited during the talks, the future speakers will be recorded and the webcasts posted soon after for all to view. And, at the risk of sounding sycophantic, I believe our University Librarian's - Wendy P. Lougee - opening remarks are also worth a listen on their own merits.

Lorcan Dempsey - "Discovery and Delivery"
Dempsey began by describing levels of rarity of library collections based on OCLC data with the suggestion that where libraries should focus their expenditures (presumably on preservation, simply having the space to hold, doing really good digitization, etc) is on the rare items. Non-rare items could reasonably be entrusted to network-level services like the Hathi Trust. He then presented a typology of library collection types sorted by rarity and current levels of stewardship. Government publications fell into high stewardship, but low rarity. Dempsey acknowledged that this was a broad characterization and that there might be rare items within a category like government publications or maps. Also, the University of Minnesota is a partner in the Hathi Trust and has sent some of its government publications collection in for digitizing, so the Libraries are already on the path he's describing here. Caveats aside, I feel that he provides a well-reasoned and evidence-based rationale for shifting stewardship away from non-rare items and towards collections that are getting no real attention at all. This was only a tiny portion of his overall talk and I recommend going through the entire powerpoint or webcast to get the full presentation.

Presentation, Webcast, Related Readings: https://wiki.lib.umn.edu/Staff/UniversityLibrariesSpeakerSeries#dempsey

Paul Courant - "Scholarly Communications and Publishing"
Courant's talk can be best described as a reflection on just what is it that we'd like to pay for. He framed part of the problem in terms of the Parable of the Anarchist's Annual Meeting (see http://www.econ.ucsb.edu/~tedb/Journals/anarchists.pdf). In short: with coordination - either between libraries or between libraries and smaller publishers or both - we can take at least some control of the journal publishing arena. We already spend a fortune on a situation we don't like. Surely the logical thing is to begin to spend some money on creating a situation more to our liking. This includes taking on more of a publishing role and allying ourselves with societies and small publishers (including university presses) who might be more interested in the benefits of open access that the big vendors. However, when I asked if he was advocating canceling contracts with big vendors, he answered (I'm paraphrasing) "Well, probably not. Well, not entirely. Might want to pass on those Big Deals they offer though."

He also felt the library community should speak up loudly in favor of the recent RFI from the Office of Science and Technology Policy regarding increased access to the products of federally funded research. At the same time he reiterated that open access isn't exclusively a library issue. In fact, he said it's a faculty issue. Libraries need to keep pushing on the topic, but pushing faculty to understand that this is an arena they can control if the choose to do so.

Courant isn't a librarian - he's an economist by background and I found his application of an economics perspective refreshing. Again, like Dempsey's talk, there was no magic "the Libraries should do this" moment because we are in a tough spot without easy resolution. But, also like Dempsey's talk, he has a great way of expressing the issues facing libraries.

Presentation, Webcast, Related Readings: https://wiki.lib.umn.edu/Staff/UniversityLibrariesSpeakerSeries#courant

I don't know if these speakers really will lead to concrete ideas for coping with our budget problems, but I sure am glad we're having them - each one has been thought-provoking.

Catching up with some updates released in August:

CRS has updated its Access to Government Information in the United States report. The latest edition is dated August 31, 2009 (via OpenCRS.com).

The Justice Department released its 2009 edition of Department of Justice Guide to the Freedom of Information Act on August 10. The announcement says the "2009 edition contains a newly updated and revised discussion of all aspects of the Freedom of Information Act, as amended by the OPEN Government Act, including the Act's procedural requirements, its exemptions and exclusions, as well as considerations applicable to FOIA litigation."

I thought I would give the readers of FGI the first scoop on some early research that is coming out of the University of Maryland on how members of Congress are using Twitter.

Twitter Use by the U.S. Congress (currently under review)

Abstract: Twitter is a microblogging service boasting over 7 million members and growing at a tremendous rate. With the buzz surrounding the service have come claims of its ability to transform the way people interact and share information, and calls for public figures to start using the site. In this study, we examine the way Twitter is being used by legislators, particularly by members of the United States Congress. We read and coded over 4,500 posts from all members of Congress using the site. Our analysis shows that Congresspeople are primarily using Twitter to post information, particularly links to news articles about them and their blog posts, and to report on their simple activities. These tend not to provide new insights into government or the legislative process or to improve transparency; rather, they are vehicles for self-promotion. However, Twitter is also facilitating direct communication between Congresspeople and citizens, though this is a less popular activity. In this paper, we report on our results, analysis, and provide suggestions for how Twitter can be used by Congresspeople in ways that benefit the citizens, not just the PR machines of the legislators themselves.

From the results of this study we found that Twitter is being used effectively in some spaces and not as effectively in others. In particular, Twitter has created opportunities for increased communication between citizens and Congresspeople, but the majority of posts contained information or location and activities which were being used for outreach and self promotion rather than to provide information that is helpful to citizens.

* Note this paper has been submitted for an upcoming conference but has NOT been accepted, peer-reviewed, or published. Please DO NOT CITE this article but if you are interested feel free to contact me.

DataFerrett (Federated Electronic Research, Review, Extraction, and Tabulation Tool) is a free data mining and extraction tool developed by the U.S. Census Bureau that allows users to search, browse, combine, tabulate, recode, and analyze statistical data from a network of online data libraries. The DataFerret software can be downloaded from the website or ran in the browser via a java applet.

Some material to read before getting started:

1. DataFerret Brochure
2. Getting Starting with DataFerrett Tour
3. DataFerret User Guide

Available data sets included:

• American Community Survey (ACS)
• American Housing Survey (AHS)
• Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS)
• Consumer Expenditure Survey (CES)
• County Business Patterns (CBP)
• Current Population Survey (CPS)
• Decennial Census of Population and Housing
• Harvard-MIT Data Center Collection
• Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA)
• Local Employment Dynamics (LED)
• National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS)
• National Center for Health Statistics Mortality (MORT)
• National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (HANES)
• National Health Interview Survey (NHIS)
• National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS)
• National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife (FHWAR)
• Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates (SAIPE)
• Social Security Administration (SSA)
• Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP)
• Survey of Program Dynamics (SPD)

DataFerret is a wonderful tool for exploring and analyzing data. Enjoy!

(found via Open Access News)

The University of Nebraska-Lincoln Library has recently put together a very unique collection of government information. Free and available to all, UNL's Government Comics Collection is a digital library containing 174 scanned comics books from various government entities. In the government realm, comics books have had a long and rich history as a delivery medium for government information. UNL has managed to successfully amass a pretty impressive collection.

(found via MetaFilter)

Data.gov is now live and ready for you to explore!

The purpose of Data.gov is to increase public access to high value, machine readable datasets generated by the Executive Branch of the Federal Government.

You have a say in the future of Data.gov by suggesting datasets to include and suggest improvements/enhancements to the website.

Data.gov has a searchable data catalog that gives access to data through the "raw" data catalog and by using tools. "The Raw Data Catalog provides an instant download of machine readable, platform-independent datasets while the Tools Catalog provides hyperlinks to tools that allow you to mine datasets."

Please note that by accessing datasets or tools offered on Data.gov, you agree to the Data Policy, which you should read before accessing any dataset or tool.

Here is an excerpt from the policy that we need to read closely:

Secondary Use
Data accessed through Data.gov do not, and should not, include controls over its end use. However, as the data owner or authoritative source for the data, the submitting Department or Agency must retain version control of datasets accessed. Once the data have been downloaded from the agency's site, the government cannot vouch for their quality and timeliness. Furthermore, the US Government cannot vouch for any analyses conducted with data retrieved from Data.gov.

Citing Data
The agency's preferred citation for each dataset is included in its metadata. Users should also cite the date that data were accessed or retrieved from Data.gov. Finally, users must clearly state that "Data.gov and the Federal Government cannot vouch for the data or analyses derived from these data after the data have been retrieved from Data.gov."

What do you think? Is the policy fair? Any suggestions for improvement we could make to Data.gov?

For more information, visit their FAQ and Tutorial.

Also, check out Sunlight Lab's "Apps for America 2: The Data.gov Challenge"!

Just as the federal government begins to provide data in Web developer-friendly formats, we're organizing Apps for America 2: The Data.gov Challenge to demonstrate that when government makes data available it makes itself more accountable and creates more trust and opportunity in its actions. The contest submissions will also show the creativity of developers in designing compelling applications that provide easy access and understanding for the public while also showing how open data can save the government tens of millions of dollars by engaging the development community in application development at far cheaper rates that traditional government contractors.

Now, let's go play around with this new site and make suggestions, shall we?

Dr. Elizabeth Losh, digital rhetoric scholar at U.C. Irvine, presents her research on how government agencies are using social media and how their use impacts government information and the public record.

Video of presentation (~68 minutes)

Presentation Slides

The Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP) has launched a set of videos on the FDLP Desktop, "What Does the Public Know About the FDLP? GPO Takes to the Streets". Staff members of GPO "took to the streets" of D.C. to ask the public what they know about the FDLP and Government Publications. What do they know? Not much, as evidenced by these videos! These videos can be embedded on your website, so let's take a look at them here, shall we?

The marketing plan website states that "As evidenced by the Person on the Street videos, promoting the FDLP to the public is essential and necessary".

I agree. However, is the FDLP Marketing Plan as it stands now, up to the job? Feedback was requested and the results of these findings were published. I think they need to ask for more feedback and publish more results soon, especially for those that did not get to take part in this feedback opportunity before.

One problem I have with the marketing plan is the slogan itself, "Easy as FDL: Free Dedicated Limitless" which I believe means absolutely nothing to the average person, which they proved in these videos! They don't know what a FDL stands for. They don't know what a Federal Depository Library is. So why use Easy as FDL as one's slogan to market itself?

Case in point: A couple of months ago, I left a bunch of the most recent "Easy as FDL" marketing promotional materials on our library brochure table for patrons to take, but I also left a bunch of the older GPO/FDLP promotional materials on the table as well (i.e. the brochures that have images of our nation's capitol building, stating "Make the Connection for Government Information", etc). Which ones were completely gone by the end of the week? The older materials. Which were left still sitting on the table? The newer "Easy as FDL" materials. From what I can deduce, patrons grabbed the visuals that had the "government information" phrase on it and the visual of a capitol building or an American flag because those images and phrases "spoke to them" more and they knew exactly what the brochure was about. Hopefully they took the time to read the brochure and learn more about what an FDL is, but I feel the term "government information" grabs their attention a whole lot more!

The marketing plan website also states that "GPO designed The FDLP Marketing Plan to empower Federal depository libraries with the tools they need to market their valuable services to all audiences in the most effective way possible."

I disagree. I don't think they designed the marketing plan to empower Federal depository libraries in the most effective way possible and I don't think we did a very good job of giving them enough feedback. I think that we ("we" meaning librarians, patrons, GPO, FDLP, etc) still need to improve and redesign the marketing plan in a more effective way. What do you think? Let's give GPO our feedback and ideas! A lot of work was put into this but lets make this a labor of love and really work to improve it even more.

The Sunlight Foundation has a new website called OOGL: Open Our Government List, for you to vote and submit ideas for what the Open Government Directive should address.

Shortly after President Obama's inauguration, he issued a memo on transparency directing his top officials to develop plans for an Open Government Directive to promote transparency, participation, and collaboration. The Sunlight Foundation has created this page in order to add a public element to the crafting of this Open Government Directive that is itself transparent, participatory, and collaborative.

So far, the highest vote goes to Ethics Information, APIs & Bulk Data Access, and Procedural Information.

Spread the word and vote!

The Sunlight Foundation, Open The Government and the Center for Democracy and Technology have done it again. They've created yet another cool initiative called Show Us the Data for you to "identify the 10 Most Wanted Government Documents, Reports or Data Sets that should be available on the Web"!

Is the federal government putting the information you need online? Are there categories of unclassified documents or data that you know exist–on paper or in government computers and databases–that would be of value to the public if posted and regularly updated on an agency's Web site? If so, then help Open The Government and the Center for Democracy and Technology identify the 10 Most Wanted Government Documents, Reports or Data Sets that should be available on the Web. Use this site to tell us what data you want and who has it, (“Request a Document”) or add your vote (up to three times) to the suggestions others have made.
The deadline to submit documents and vote is March 9, 2009

Ok. It just hit me. I just set myself up with the goal of blogging for each of the next 72 days about government information that will court and spark, to steal a line from Joni Mitchell, in order to get people excited about their constitutional structures and the best values of civic information.

What was I thinking?

So, here is what caught my eye today, from the Nov. 9, 2008 "After the Imperial Presidency" article in the NYTimes Sunday Magazine (http://www.nytimes.com/pages/magazine/index.html.) But it wasn't just this article, there was another that, juxtaposed with the Presidency one -- Check Cashers, Redeemed -- that struck me there might be some lessons here about government information and neighborhood services.

In a very real sense the constitutional functions work because it requires the president and congress to exhcange trust and information -- much like a bank's liquidity -- and either part of the relationship freezes up, or ignores the other -- then we have severe information dislocation.

Libraries and other cultural institutions are like local branches in this national information exchange. The technology and social organization of these institutions should work hand in hand to keep the citizens constantly informed of what is happening inside their governing bodies.

Again, the opportunities are out, if we can just risk and grab at the opportunity.

Talk to you on Day 71 -- an hope we start getting some two-way traffic going....

As I thought about this week's remarkable series of electoral and civic revolutions, it got me thinking that between now and Obama's inauguration on January 20, 2009 offers us a unique opportunity.

Each day I am going to post one specific reason, observation, analysis about how the new political powers in Congress and the White House should think about government information. In particular I want to push back against the nearly ten years of rhetorical tide that swamped the way we talk about the distribution and preservation of information produced by our government.

In particular, I hope we can recapture the conceptual high ground of the whys and hows of the civic conversation about government information. Technology is important. Market forces are compelling. Political partisanship demands committment. But I remember a time when the phrase "documents to the people" actually spoke to a civic form of rhetorical community organizing. Our collections and public services were our store front headquarters in this struggle.

So, here is my first thought of the day: any depository library program's purpose transcends both format or its distribution mechanism. The programs long-standing purpose is to sustain the free and permanent access to government information. This can and must happen regardless of how the depository libraries, or their host institutions, arrange their services or materials.

Let the conversation begin and see you tomorrow.

My previous post got me thinking about how other countries are handling government information and/or e-Government service and comparing it to our situation. Then I started reminiscing about my recent travels to London. While I was there, I paid a visit to the Parliament Bookstore and browsed their shelf of "Daily Parliament Publications". It made me smile to see how similar it was to the GPO Bookstore! So when I returned home, I did some investigating online to see how they handle printing of their official government publications and initiatives of e-government services they are working on.

According to the Brookings Institute study, Great Britain's e-Government status ranks 35 out of 197 which I find hard to believe. I would've ranked them much higher, but then again, I'm not an expert and didn't conduct the study. The study praises their government web portal, Direct Gov, which puts "public services all in one place" according to their logo. Their promotional video cracks me up but it makes some great points! In some ways it's quite similar to USA.gov.

I also enjoy looking at their Parliament homepage and the online Bills and Legislation section. To learn more about Great Britain's progress in e-Government, go to governmentontheweb.org and read the status reports by the National Audit Office. The report states that "The Office of the e-Envoy (OeE) should be more active in monitoring and reporting departments' progress in putting services online, their take-up by the public, and the quality and use made of departments' websites" and "Digital certificates are used by some organisations for authentication but they can be costly and time-consuming for citizens and business to obtain. The OeE should work with IT industry to ease this process". Surprisingly, there is little mention of digital preservation of government information but there is a whole page devoted to the issue at the UK National Archive's site.

Also, the nearest British equivalent to GPO would be the Office of Public Sector Information(formerly known as Her Majesty's Stationary Office) and The Stationary Office Not sure if they have a depository library system like we do though...but they mention that "all local authority funded public libraries are eligible to receive a subsidy on official publications. The subsidy is given to facilitate public access to legislation, Parliamentary and Government materials".

Anyway, I just thought that was interesting and wanted to pass the information along. Do you know of any other countries that have spectacular e-Government services? I want to check out what the German government is doing online...thank goodness Ich spreche Deutsch!

Several student patrons are working on research papers about the Cold War era and some are focusing on the nuclear arms race and the fear of nuclear attack. It's been fascinating finding and reading materials we have in our print collection, including information published by the Federal Civil Defense Administration (FCDA) in the 1950s and the Office of Civil and Defense Mobilization (OCDM) during the Kennedy administration. (For a concise history of civil defense preparedness, read "Civil Defense and Homeland Security: A Short History of National Preparedness Efforts" published by the Homeland Security National Preparedness Task Force).

The students are just as fascinated (and sometimes amused) as I am with these documents that represent an era we never knew and a fear we can't relate to. Or maybe we can relate...our generation lives in fear of terrorism "code red" rather than the red scare of communism or atom bomb attack, but it's still a fear.

Anyways, the students and I found some more civil defense documents listed in the print Monthly Catalogs (we owned some FCDA and OCDM docs, but not as many as I would've liked), but we also found some on the internet. So I thought I'd share some of these online government sources I've discovered in my hunt for all things Cold War/Civil Defense related:

* Clips of historical "test" films at the DOE agency website.

* "Mr. Civil Defense Tells About Natural Disasters!" A government document comic book!

* "In Time of Emergency: A Citizen's Handbook on Nuclear Attack, Natural Disasters" (1968).

* The "Survival Under Atomic Attack" booklet can be found in federal depositories, but here is an online transcription.

* NARA records of the OCDM.

* "Atomic Culture" article by the U.S. Centennial of Flight Commission.

* Not a government source, but a virtual Civil Defense Museum website created by a Civil Defense enthusiast.

* "Civil Defense Log Dies at 67, and Some Mourn It's Passing" article at NYTimes.com.


And my favorite...Civil Defense videos!

* Internet Archive's collection of Civil Defense Films and other media/film resources on civil defense.

* Some of YouTube's collection of Civil Defense Films.

Did they really think ducking n' covering under a school desk would protect them from a nuclear attack?

Not sure how many of you already know about this NextGov.com website, but I just found out about it and I think it's only been around for a year. It's a spin off of Government Executive.com and provides "coverage and commentary on the management of information technology in the federal government". I'm also enjoying their Tech Insider blog.

Take a look at NextGov's recently posted news article - "Public satisfaction with e-government lowest since 2005":

"The dip in scores is due to several factors, including uncertainty about the upcoming presidential election and administration transition...rather than reflecting an actual decline in service,...the dip in scores more likely reflects users' rising expectations. For the first time, government has to keep up with the private sector in terms of service levels. They are just not used to moving at the same pace, with the same focus and intensity as the private sector."