Participants: Michael S. Glickman (Chief Operating Officer, Center for Jewish History); Deanna Marcum (Associate Library for Library Services, Library of Congress); Oren Weinberg (Director General, National Library of Israel); Moderator: Stanley N. Katz (Director, Center for Arts and Cultural Policy Studies, Princeton University)
Library and archival institutions worldwide are facing the challenge of selecting, processing and presenting collections of electronic material—both digital surrogates of print books/material objects and electronic material published (or “posted”) using new technology/media.
Librarians and archivists must develop new selection processes—with so much available, what is worth keeping? Deanna Marcum provides a timely example of the dilemma: The Library of Congress has accepted a deal with Twitter to accept the Twitter archives…so, now what?
Is there any such thing as “garbage” (or tweets that just aren’t worth archiving, for example)? If we don’t have print publication and the “natural selection” (as Oren Weinberg calls it) of traditional libraries, what are the new standards for material worthy of collections?
Lauren tweets: “I wonder if they have any idea how many people are tweeting about their panel. #notgarbage.”
//
With an influx of electronic material, how does an institution decide what to prioritize—and how can it best provide access and information to its users? What types of permissions are required to absorb electronic material that is technically public to all (because of the medium in which it is “published”) but still somehow (maybe) the intellectual property of its creator?
Stanley N. Katz poses the question to panelists: Is there a particular challenge that institutions should prioritize in order to best serve users / enable them to enjoy the highest level of electronic access?
Oren Weinberg speaks about the importance of institutions establishing this common goal: Users must be given the most information—and highest level of access—possible.
Deanna Marcum explains that institutions often have to compete for funding and must try to come up with attention-grabbing projects.
Michael S. Glickman points out that it is essential to continue the conversation beyond this conference, sharing ideas, challenges and possible solutions that could benefit each of our academic communities, libraries or institutions–and the field of “Jewish studies” at large.
Join the conversation: #cjh-a2i