July 2004

A Review and a Rant

Aleksandar Hemon has written a review of over at Slate. He calls it the worst book he has ever voluntarily read. He says he wrote this review because this scribbling is that it is exactly what you end up with if publishing and fiction writing become a pursuit of cheap hipness and movie rights.

“Perhaps it should be encouraging to young writers to know they are running out of cool authors in New York, so they have to import them from Switzerland. Or to witness that the democratic ideal inherent in literature—everybody has something to say—has reached its limit in Wagner’s case: It is no longer necessary to be able to write in order to be a writer.

TX Critics target 120 library books for young readers

An Anonymous Patron writes The HoustonChronicle.com Reports A new group has formed to address the selection and placement of books at the Montgomery County Memorial Library System, and it is targeting 120 works aimed at children and young adults.

Called Library Patrons of Texas Inc., the group wants an age-appropriate policy at the system and targeting books with sexual and gay themes, as well as those with what the group says is offensive language.

Among those are Silly Duck by Harvey Fierstein, The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky, Deal With It! by Esther Drill and Rainbow Boys by Alex Sanchez.”

RFID article in Salon.com

joanatnoshame sent over The checkout line — or the check-you-out line? from salon.com.

By embracing RFID, librarians have raised the ire of civil libertarians who have long looked askance at the technology. They find it alarming that librarians, who are normally among society’s staunchest defenders of intellectual freedom and First Amendment values, are contributing to the electronic erosion of privacy. You’ll need to subscribe or watch a brief ad and get a free day pass.

What are the 874 Books on the FBI’s watch List?

Zorro7 writes “A paid subscription political-economic online newsletter I subscribe to called “Al Martin Raw” last week made a rather startling announcement, from a librarian-standpoint. After summarizing the July 8th Patriot Acts’ reaffirmation of the part of the act that allows the feds to snoop on your library book borrowing habits and book-buying habits, he says this: “As it relates to booksellers, it further authorizes the FBI to force booksellers to turn over a list to the FBI of all book titles that they may be selling and all book titles that their customers may have requested. This was the part that was very controversial to librarians and others concerned about the vast power of this; in that it effectively gives government the ability not only to monitor what people read but to use that monitoring system as a basis for declaring people to be seditious or otherwise targeting citizens for special investigation.” But hat’s nothing:
it gets much more interesting.
He continues, “It’s interesting to note some of the books that are on the FBI’s so-called potentially seditious list. They include Presidential historian Dr. Michael Beschloss’s book on Thomas Jefferson and the Constitution. That was reported on FSTV, which went through a list of books. Many of the books considered seditious are books that detail citizens’ rights and liberties under the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.” Then he mentions that Ashcroft said they merely were looking to find people checking out bomb-making books, etc, which, says Martin, “was completely false.”

But here’s the REALLY interesting, pay dirt quote from the article:

Zorro7 writes “A paid subscription political-economic online newsletter I subscribe to called “Al Martin Raw” last week made a rather startling announcement, from a librarian-standpoint. After summarizing the July 8th Patriot Acts’ reaffirmation of the part of the act that allows the feds to snoop on your library book borrowing habits and book-buying habits, he says this: “As it relates to booksellers, it further authorizes the FBI to force booksellers to turn over a list to the FBI of all book titles that they may be selling and all book titles that their customers may have requested. This was the part that was very controversial to librarians and others concerned about the vast power of this; in that it effectively gives government the ability not only to monitor what people read but to use that monitoring system as a basis for declaring people to be seditious or otherwise targeting citizens for special investigation.” But hat’s nothing:
it gets much more interesting.
He continues, “It’s interesting to note some of the books that are on the FBI’s so-called potentially seditious list. They include Presidential historian Dr. Michael Beschloss’s book on Thomas Jefferson and the Constitution. That was reported on FSTV, which went through a list of books. Many of the books considered seditious are books that detail citizens’ rights and liberties under the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.” Then he mentions that Ashcroft said they merely were looking to find people checking out bomb-making books, etc, which, says Martin, “was completely false.”

But here’s the REALLY interesting, pay dirt quote from the article:
“Did you know that there are 874 titles now on the FBI’s so-called Watch List under this amendment – and none of those books have anything to do with how to construct a bomb, or how to blow anything up, or how to sabotage anything? They are books which explain your constitutional rights and liberties, your rights under the Bill of Rights as a US citizen, expose the misdeeds of the Bushonian Cabal, and also books that explain certain court precedents in the past, or certain fictional books that reveal so-called classified information regarding illegal covert activities of the US government in the past.”

Now I’m a librarian, for many years, and so I decide it would be worthwhile to email Martin to request the source of this list of the 874 books he is referring to above, since I could not find anything via Google. It seems many people who subscribe to his newsletter emailed him the same question. Here’s his reply, made in today’s newsletter: “People have asked about the books that have been put on the watch list by the FBI, and what I say, is that’s why people subscribe to Al Martin Raw.com. Because these 874 titles are classified and therefore are not accessible by Google, which seems to be counted as the lazy man’s research these days. Not only that, but because of Al Martin Raw.com’s intimate knowledge of government agencies, we can point out the ways in which they attempt to hide information. How I found the information was on a very arcane website maintained by something called The Office of Strategic Analysis, which doesn’t even look like a government website. As a matter of fact, it isn’t even in the United States — yet it is.
To even get to it, you have to go onto the Office of Information Awareness. Then you have to go into what’s called the password or the key code section, wherein you have to enter your government code, which is issued by the FBI; you have to have the number code of the month in order to proceed further. Actually, you can get in — if you have access to the FBI’s security code passbooks, because they’re the ones that actually have them printed, which have hundreds and hundreds of codes in them. They’re printed every month, and the codes change every month. These are codes that are used to gain entry into, not necessarily restricted government websites, but websites that are frankly arcane, that are shadowy, that don’t even look like government websites. (Of course , we do not have such a book)”

Anyway, if anyone has access to the site at “The Office of Strategic Analysis,” perhaps you have access to it and share with us the 878 titles on the FBI watch list?

Here’s Martin’s site, which has biographical information on him – he’s a turncoat from the Republicans, and has worked for the feds as well as a stock broker, and he’s not a kook, from what I can tell, and his newsletter are very information-rich:

http://www.almartinraw.com/

It seems he’s gotten somebody in the government very angry, as he says today, “Readers should be advised that the Al Martin Raw general counsel has received a communication from the Department of Justice informing us that the secret National Security Court, contained within the rotted bowels of the Department of Justice, has determined that certain contents of the Al Martin Raw.com website is in violation of Statute 432 of the National Security Acts of 1949-50; and that, in fact, the Department of Justice was undertaking action to block access to AlMartinRaw.com on publicly owned computer terminals.” These acts have to do with “sedition.” He adds, “This came to my attention, not only by notification from the Department of Justice, but in my weekly radio show with Tony Trupiano, wherein one of my subscribers, a professor at the University of California in Berkeley, informed me that this campus was blocking access to Al Martin Raw.com. I have subsequently become aware that this blocking is system-wide within the University of California, since another subscriber at UC Irvine has also confirmed this fact.” “Publically-owned” of course, means libraries.

Very strange; there’s no porn or anybody’s credit card numbers on his site, yet they block him. Things are getting stranger and stranger…”

Is Boston Telling Whoppers over First Library?

Walter Skold writes “The noisy herd of Donkeys assembled in Boston this week are being fed the same kind of “enhanced truths” from Beantown that jaded voters expect to hear from politicians these days.
In spiffy subway ads paid for by Boston 2004, Inc., signed by Mayor Thomas Menino, and created pro-bono by Arnold Worldwide advertising, the host city makes several false claims, the first being that Boston is the home of America’s first public library.

Being from Pennsylvania originally, where another ex-Bostonian, Benjamin Franklin, created the first shareholder library in 1731 (which relied on dues, not taxes or town vote), I was immediately skeptical of this claim.

So I contacted the Peterborough, New Hampshire library, which is considered by most library historians as the first public lending library in the US.

Walter Skold writes “The noisy herd of Donkeys assembled in Boston this week are being fed the same kind of “enhanced truths” from Beantown that jaded voters expect to hear from politicians these days.
In spiffy subway ads paid for by Boston 2004, Inc., signed by Mayor Thomas Menino, and created pro-bono by Arnold Worldwide advertising, the host city makes several false claims, the first being that Boston is the home of America’s first public library.

Being from Pennsylvania originally, where another ex-Bostonian, Benjamin Franklin, created the first shareholder library in 1731 (which relied on dues, not taxes or town vote), I was immediately skeptical of this claim.

So I contacted the Peterborough, New Hampshire library, which is considered by most library historians as the first public lending library in the US. Michael Price, the director, responded with a quote from an official Boston Public Library publication in 1911, which admitted:

“The free town library of Peterborough, New Hampshire, now recognized as the first free public library supported by a municipal tax among English-speaking people, was established…” in 1833.
“So much for corporate memory,” he quipped, joking that Peterborough (pop 6,000) doesn’t have enough money for an ad campaign.

“I think their justification is that they’re bigger, so they count more” added Brian Hackert, the reference librarian at Peterborough.

“We both apply the same library characteristics to our origins, and the timeline clearly shows that they were later,” wrote Hackert, “Yet they deliberately enhance their history by mislabeling themselves.”

For a DNC delegate from New York it would be like seeing an ad which claimed Boston has the world’s winningest baseball team. Preposterous! Outlandish! Au Contraire!

So, unless someone from Mayor Menino’s office goes over to the BPL rare book room and stuffs that 1911 report into their pants when the archivists aren’t looking, it is valid to ask “Why is Boston lying?”

It’s a shame when a big city attempts to drop the historical record of a little town like Peterborough into an Orwellian memory hole! Why should Big Brother Boston take all the credit?

Officials at Arnold Worldwide contacted Friday said that perhaps those who worked on the campaign could get back to me Monday, and the first BPL officials I contacted Thursday morning stuck by the claims on their website. (http://www.bpl.org/guides/firsts.htm). They were also swamped with preparing for big DNC events, so they couldn’t give my little question first billing.

Then on Thursday afternoon BPL’s President, Dr. Bernard Margolis, was gracious enough to send me a quick e-mail in which he upheld Boston’s claims, but also acknowledged the “semantic issues” and long-standing “jockeying with Peterboro” that is involved as well.

Margolis mentioned that Bostonians, not BPL as a modern institution, notes a “continuous line of service� that goes back to 1657, when Captain Robert Keayne’s left money in his will for a library. Some public monies were voted for the upkeep of this building, which housed State records, but it burnt to the ground in 1711.

Michael Price acknowledged that “it basically comes down to how you define a ‘public library’,” but still maintained that based on the standard definitions of what constitutes a tax-funded public library, “It happened here first, in 1833.”

There is also the matter of the conclusion from BPL’s own 1911 report, and the consensus among library historians that Peterborough was first.

An official ALA history from the sixties akknowledge that the BPL was the first large public library in America, whose founding in 1848 and opening in 1854 did have had the most influence on the future of public libraries. For this Americans should be grateful.

Nonetheless, Hackert argues that BPL fudges on their title “to make it more important,” and thinks “they have an obligation to include the word “large” wherever they make the “first” claim.”

And to confuse things, there are other claimants to the title of first public library too: Charleston, SC; Brunswick, NJ; Salem, MA; Salisbury, CT; and even more.

The ALA comes to town next January and those 20,000 delegates know how to do their fact checking. Maybe the BPL could sponsor a good-old American debate and representatives from each library could state their case?

As for the Boston2004 propa, uh, I mean ad campaign, the even bigger beefless whopper they are selling to DNC delegates is this: they are claiming that “Democracy” itself was created in Boston!

Can you beat that one!

Are there no Greeks in Boston who read that and reach for their swords?

When is John Edwards going to call one of his trial-lawyer friends and seek damages in a class-action suit for false advertising?

It is a sad day for our Constitutional Republic when a founding city has forgotten the warnings of it’s founding fathers. If a delegate goes over to majestic BPL and asks for the original papers of John Adams, they’ll find this quote that Boston 2004 somehow overlooked:

“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.�

Thomas Jefferson’s oft-quoted remark is in the same vein: “an enlightened citizenry is indispensable for the proper functioning of a republic.”

Maybe the Donkeys don’t want folks to be reminded that gaining power by trading votes for programs that are paid for in mandatory taxes wasn’t a virtue in 1776? Come to think of it, lot’s of their fat, big-spending friends among the Elephants about to stampede in New York probably agree!

With all due respect to Boston — which does have great baked beans, excellent universities, a vital history of liberty, a baseball team that brings Yankee fans joy each fall when it tanks, and a truly historic library — change the Pinocchio claims in your next ad campaign.

Or prove them.

As for Al Gore, I just have one word of caution. You better guard your legacy, like Peterborough, cause pretty soon Menino and the creative folks at Arnolds may be claiming that Boston invented the Internet too.

Walter Skold is a card-carrying member of the ALA and the BPL and an independent librarian and journalist currently living in Maine, the first
state in the Union.”

New RSS feed for Beyond the Job career development blog

Sarah Johnson writes “For those of you who had subscribed to the RSS feed for Rachel Singer Gordon’s and my professional development blog, “Beyond the Job,” the feed has changed due to circumstances beyond our control. (ie, Feedster stopped working!) We’re posting this a couple of places, because you’ll never see the announcement on the blog, given that the old feed doesn’t work :).

New feed:
http://librarycareers.blogspot.com/atom.xml
The blog itself:
http://librarycareers.blogspot.com

Sorry for the inconvenience! Please unsubscribe from the old feed and add the new.

If you don’t know what I’m talking about and you’re interested in professional development opportunities (calls for papers, conference announcements, job hunting tips), check out the blog itself: http://librarycareers.blogspot.com . Enjoy!

–Sarah and Rachel”

WLANs Exposed by Hack

News from eWeek:Complete Story

A wireless LAN hardware company is set to publicize a RADIUS server security hack that can thwart the recently ratified 802.11i protocol and any WLAN infrastructure that keeps encryption keys housed in access points rather than on a central switch.

RFID & LIBRARIES – Convenience versus Privacy – Growing Controversy!

http://search-engines-web.com/ writes

For librarians, new identification chips in books make life easier. But civil libertarians say the smart books are a scary invasion of privacy.

http://www.berkeleypubliclibrary.org/BESTPRAC.pdf

http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2004/07/26/rfid_ library/index.html

This week, staffers at the Berkeley Public Library will begin putting radio frequency identification (RFID) tags in half of the 500,000 items in their collection.

When the tags embedded in copies of “Gone With the Wind” and “Mein Kampf” pass within 18 inches of the library’s RFID readers, they’ll come to life, revealing a unique identification number specific to each individual copy. The tags will allow readers to do their own checkouts and will liberate librarians from the monotonous — and sometimes painful — task of endlessly scanning books.

By implementing the system this fall, the Berkeley Public Library will join more than 300 libraries around the world that have already outfitted their books with RFID tags,
including the

Santa Clara City Library,
the Maricopa County Library in Arizona,
the University of Nevada, Las Vegas Libraries, the Independence Township library in Michigan and the National University of Singapore Libraries.
ven the Vatican Library’s vast collection is getting chipped.

Where to keep your data truly safe…

Anonymous Patron writes “Think the data on your PC is so important that losing it would have the same, or worse, consequences for your family than you being hit by a bus? Peter Cochrane Does.

With the recent rise in terrorism, cyber-attacks, political instability and environmental changes due to global warming, he recently got to thinking about the ultimate back-up locations.

Two locations stuck out as being ideal for the mass data back-up of all our most vital data: deep in the ice of the Antarctic or, perhaps even better, the far side of the moon”