--- Begin Forwarded Message ---
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 23:34:50 -0500
From: [log in to unmask]
Subject: GPO depository program:  another vendor's thoughts
Sender: [log in to unmask]



A couple thoughts from another map and publication seller who is
actively engaged in the migration from paper to digital:

1.  Let me cite one depository item elimination of which some of
you may be aware:  the Foreign Broadcast Information Service
(FBIS), an arm of the CIA which monitors, selects and translates
articles and other snippets from the foreign press and mass media.
For years they published various "FBIS Daily Reports" series that in
_paper form_ (later in microfiche) lined the walls of GovDoc libraries
across the country.  Really turgid stuff, but mother's milk for your
typical grad student in international/public policy studies.  At the
Univ of Minnesota and Columbia I practically lived in this section of
the library.
        About five-six years ago the then-FBIS director, Bob Schreiner,
decided that paper was for bozos and henceforth FBIS materials will
be available in soft-copy only, i.e., as part of a big internal database.
Now, while this possibly made sense for FBIS' immediate users
(CIA and other USG analysts), who over the course of years had
become accustomed to the internal (restricted to you and me)
databases which contained all the FBIS open-source publications
and much else, it had quite a different effect upon the flow of such
information to the general public.
        To make a long story short, the rich FBIS paper series was
indeed discontinued.  Availability to the public of the FBIS content
now was to be via the NTIS-run "World News Connection," web-
mounted database which I suppose every depository library has free
access to.  Even so, what many people do not realize is that this
database contains only a tiny fraction of the articles which used to
appear in the printed version.  The reason:  NTIS fear of copyright
violation against foreign media publishers.  NTIS only allowed into
its watered-down database those sources for which they could
conclude contracts.  In the old days, when FBIS printed the paper
series, NTIS as distributor never really cared about this issue; but in
a digital age, copyright suddenly became more visible.  Who is
guilty?  Arguably not FBIS, since their customer is the CIA, not the
general public, and CIA is satisfied.  And not NTIS, since obviously
they are just following counsel's advice on copyright questions.  But
the depository libraries and their patrons suffer--there is much less
information available to the public which is otherwise available to
government officials.  I would also add that because FBIS printed
publications are no longer available, FBIS itself is much less a
household word among either GovDoc librarians or grad students.
On balance, I think that lower visibility for a government agency is
bad both for the public and the agency.

For me, the morals are several, but basically boil down to the road
to Hell being paved with good intentions:
        1.  You need both digital and paper--they are not equivalent in
either form or content.
        2.  If paper can be dumped at all, much more work needs to be
done among producing entities and distribution entities to ensure
that information is not being lost in the transition.  There are many
complex technical and other issues.
        3.  At the agency level, cost-saving measures to eliminate print
publications risk eliminating access to much of this information.
Such measures also risk lowering the visibility of the respective
organization.


2.  On the other hand--and if one of my employees said this on a
listserve I would at the very least severely reprimand them--my
general impression is that the level of technical fluency of too many
staff in too many academic and public libraries is rather lacking
when it comes to GIS and other digitized geospatial data.  This is a
tragedy because digital cartographic and imagery data is so
important, transforming and liberating.
        In this sense if the effect of a depository program elimination (or
threat of it) is to raise by shock-therapy the digital literacy of many
key people, I think it would be a welcome thing.  And if the effect is
to intensify demand amongst users for agencies to take digital
publication more seriously, so their documents become more
equally available, standardized, bug-free, permanent, user-friendly,
etc., this is also a nice thing.

3.  Quinn's suggestion that "depository libraries become somewhat
irrelevant and unnecessary" in the context of the USG's steady
march down the digital path is, I think, basically correct.  As a
patron of such libraries, I can only feel sad and pained about this.
And knowing how poorly the USG and other governmental
organizations have managed the transition from paper to digital
leaves me very skeptical.  Yet if enough people demand that public
documents be well-formated, well-organized and easily accessible
over the Internet, the concept might just work.  (I would also add
that retrospective conversion of pre-digital age govdocs--and maps--
is essential.)  As bandwidth proliferates and computers become
ubiquitous--and they will, even in the poorest places--I just don't see
how depository libraries in their present form stand a chance in the
not too-distant future, say ten years.

It is too bad that such an important issue as the digital transition is
handled so crudely by cynical politicians (or budget-cutting agency
chiefs) who profess a successful resolution of this issue simply
cutting funding for print publications.  But the two central tenets of
libraries, access and preservation, can also be addressed in the
new digital environment.  The new environment will just give us new
tools to do this.  I have no doubt that collectively we will figure it all
out.

Best regards,

Kent




Kent D. Lee
East View Cartographic, Inc.
tel: 612-550-0961
fax: 612-559-2931
http://www.cartographic.com
--- End Forwarded Message ---