Don’t Hate; Curate!

One of the hottest topics these days for museums, libraries, and archives is digital technology. What are the benefits of new technologies for us and the publics we aim to serve? What are the challenges that arise from trying to use these new forms of technology? There are so many facets to this topic, that it is hard to reduce a discussion about it to the size of a reasonable blog post. In past posts on this blog, I have talked a bit about how scholars and museum and library professionals have been facing some of these issues. But this week, after reading Erika Dicker’s, “The Impact of Blogs and Other Social Media on the Life of a Curator,” I would like to take some time here to discuss how the role of the curator has changed with this onslaught of new technologies and methodologies.

Traditionally, the curator is a subject specialist who is responsible for an institution’s collections and involved with the interpretation of that institution’s material. As a Curatorial Assistant in the Rare Book and Special Collections Division of the Library of Congress, a large part of my job was to organize, research, and give presentations about items from various collections for visitors, scholars, and colleagues. What they saw and heard in these presentations was based on my interests, my research, and my selection of which specific items to present. The rest of the collection was invisible to them.

While curators continue to do this kind of work, new technologies are changing the way institutions function, and so must the work of the curator change to match the goals of the institutions they work for. With the onslaught of interest in digitization, online exhibits and institutional blogs, curators must now embrace a new skillset and add it to their already large toolkit.

How has digital technology, including social media, changed how we see the role of the curator?

The public is more aware than ever of their own power in communicating, collecting, and curating the information that is of interest to them. Thanks to sites such as Flikr, Pinterest, and Flipboard (for more content curation sites check this out) people everywhere are now becomming their own curators. As far as the professionals are concerned, their jobs have taken on a new dimension; one which can be shared with the publics they aim to serve, thus allowing for more collaboration in a realm that was once thought to be reserved for the specialist. Professional curators can now seek out the help of their communities both before and after they produce some product for the public, and can perhaps provide material that is more suited to what people want to hear about. Indeed, through digital technology, the information curators are sharing is now accessible to more people than ever through the internet. This shared authority can be both inspiring and anciety-inducing to the professional curator.

What are your thoughts on shared authority for curating exhibits and providing interesting information for the public? Where (if anywhere) should we draw the line? Does having a Flikr or Pinterest account make you a curator in a sense?

Rogue Archivists Unite!

In the realm of digital history, one of the most challenging issues is that of preservation. What, in the mass of online information, should we be saving? How much can we realistically save? Who should do the saving? Well, Archive Team has one solution.

Archive Team is a loose collective of rogue archivists, programmers, writers and loudmouths dedicated to saving our digital heritage. Since 2009 this variant force of nature has caught wind of shutdowns, shutoffs, mergers, and plain old deletions – and done our best to save the history before it’s lost forever. Along the way, we’ve gotten attention, resistance, press and discussion, but most importantly, we’ve gotten the message out: IT DOESN’T HAVE TO BE THIS WAY.

Certainly, this is a noble effort. Companies create websites which are then used and shared by people around the world, but when the company is ready to drop the ball, where does that leave the users? Archive Team not only keeps their ears to the ground to be prepared for any upcoming potential loss of digital heritage, but also gives everyday people the tools they need to participate in this effort, and to save that which is important to them. In my previous post about digital preservation, I mentioned that collaboration was going to be key to this effort; not just between institution and institution, but also between institutions and indivisuals. Archive Team is another avenue in which individuals can participate in preserving our online heritage and digital memory.

But are there ethical and legal issues arising from this kind of rogue archiving? I don’t believe so. Archive Team is only saving that which is at risk of disappearing altogether. They are not stepping on any toes by taking money out of the pockets of these companies who are the original creators of that site. Here you can see a really great article from MIT Technology Review about Archive Team in which Scott explains that he and the Archive Team do not seek permission before undertaking one of their raids, though as a rule they only go after files that are publicly available, and Scott says most sites do not complain. There has been a TON of media coverage about the work that Archive Team is unedrtaking, and many have lauded them as heros of digital preservation. However some problems have inevitably arisen. One example is explained by Jason Scott, Archive Team’s creator, in this video called, “That Awesome Time I Was Sued for Two Billion Dollars.” If you want to hear more from Archive Team’s creator, this video shows Jason Scott explaining how and why he does this work.