There’s some discussion on Slashdot today about an excerpt from George H.W. Bush’s memoir that was apparently removed from Time’s online archives (the piece is titled "Why We Didn’t Remove Saddam"). Aside from the Orwellian speculations, some interesting questions come to mind about the responsibilities of libraries in preserving information.
There’s some discussion on Slashdot today about an excerpt from George H.W. Bush’s memoir that was apparently removed from Time’s online archives (the piece is titled "Why We Didn’t Remove Saddam"). Aside from the Orwellian speculations, some interesting questions come to mind about the responsibilities of libraries in preserving information.This sticky situation certainly caters to Umberto Eco’s position on the importance of printed publications. As with computerized voting machines, there’s always a worry when moving to a digital format that information can be corrupted covertly. Libraries have long been charged with preserving information without bias, and information trading systems such as LOCKSS are designed to continue this purpose. But how should Jayson Blair’s articles be presented? Should medical databases retract records for articles advocating what are later discovered to be deadly procedures? And how can we be prepared to meet Virginia Madsen in space?
Recent Comments