History? Eh, who needs it!: Georgia Closes State Archives

[Sutter Cane]

Anti-government, anti-public sector, anti-education, anti-liberal arts and humanities, anti-anything-that-doesn't-turn-an-immediate-profit rhetoric reaches its logical conclusion.

Georgia Closes State Archives
Only State In The Nation To Cut Historic Service

"To my knowledge, Georgia will be the only state in the country that will not have a central location in which the public can visit to research and review the historical records of their government and state."

http://www2.wsav.com/news/2012/sep/1...es-ar-4538200/

Even many third world countries still manage to maintain their historical archives.

[mfyahya]

Re: History? Eh, who needs it!: Georgia Closes State Archives

Anti-government, anti-public sector, anti-education, anti-liberal arts and humanities, anti-anything-that-doesn't-turn-an-immediate-profit rhetoric reaches its logical conclusion. Even many third world countries still manage to maintain their historical archives.

But really, is a brick and mortar state archive really needed?Wouldn't it be better to just digitize everything and have a publicly searchable website instead?

[Ghent12]

Re: History? Eh, who needs it!: Georgia Closes State Archives

What a sensationalist post. It seems people still have access to the records by appointment and the records are still maintained.

[Sutter Cane]

Re: History? Eh, who needs it!: Georgia Closes State Archives

But really, is a brick and mortar state archive really needed?Wouldn't it be better to just digitize everything and have a publicly searchable website instead?

Just the fact that you can casually throw out "just digitize everything" like it is a viable solution, shows that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. I take it you have never done research with primary documents before?

[astonas]

Re: History? Eh, who needs it!: Georgia Closes State Archives

Just the fact that you can casually throw out "just digitize everything" like it is a viable solution, shows that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. I take it you have never done research with primary documents before?

No need to be hostile...

Perhaps you could instead help us understand what information may be gleaned from the physical document that would be lost in digitization.

Thanks. :-)

[Sutter Cane]

Re: History? Eh, who needs it!: Georgia Closes State Archives

No need to be hostile...

Perhaps you could instead help us understand what information may be gleaned from the physical document that would be lost in digitization.

Thanks. :-)

Sorry if I came across as hostile, but I am disappointed to see such a response on itulip, which I generally regard as having a more enlightened readership than the usual internet sources.

"Why not just make it all digital?" is the kind of response I'd expect from someone who would also think that every police department has a computer setup like you would see on an episode of CSI. As a history buff, amateur genealogist, and someone who has done a lot of research in archives using primary source material, I can tell you that it isn't that simple.

It is not so much that a a digitized document lacks information contained in an original document (although that is often the case), it is that it is a very expensive and time-consuming process to digitize items in the first place. For some perspective, only about 10 percent of the collection at the Library of Congress is digitized, and the LOC is perhaps the best-funded and most state-of-the-art repository in the country. Most smaller institutions are lucky to have even 1% of their material digitized.

Digitizing archival documents from pre-digital eras is a pretty involved process - it isn't comparable to what Google books is doing, to take the most prominent example. The digitizing of bound volumes like books can be largely automated, especially if the books are not rare and you aren't worried about tearing them apart to feed them into an scanner. But most of the documents in public archives are not uniform in size, might be too fragile to feed into some kind of document feeder, and might also be the the only copy in existence. They would have to be laid on scanners by hand, one page at a time. Then, making the documents keyword searchable after they are scanned is also a very tedious process. The technology for character recognition just isn't there, even for typed documents, if they were typed on a manual typewriter in the 1910s. For handwritten documents (think tax ledgers from the 1800s, or letters and correspondence of historical figures) it is largely impossible. Even giving up on having the papers be keyword searchable, you would still have to enter enough metadata to make the digital document findable in a search. This is also labor-intensive, and as the article which inspired this post makes clear, most archives are having their funding cut rather than having more staff added for massive digitization initiatives.

And the larger question is, how to you ensure that a digital document is even usable decades from now? Due to file format, hardware, and software changes, it can be more difficult to read a digital document from 15 years ago than it is to read a paper document that is 200 years old. For example, depending on how old you are, you might have floppy discs sitting around that you can't access anymore.

What I'm getting at is that the public has a misconception that everything is digitized and available on the web, but the reality is quite different. In most archives, 99% of the information you want to find involves opening an actual box and going through paper documents by hand. Even if a perfect digital storage system had been devised that could compete with the longevity of paper documents (which it hasn't), it still wouldn't be cost-effective to try to digitize everything.

Some might say that these documents aren't important enough to be worth preserving, but what if you are trying to find out who owned your property 80 years ago (and what if it was a business that handled dangerous chemicals)? What if you are trying to find out exactly when a municipal or state regulation was changed that effects your business? Or what if you want to find out where your great-grandfather is buried?

If you care nothing for history, you might not find these examples persuasive. So think about it another way - since these are state archives, we are talking about government documents. I am of the opinion that public access to the records of government is fundamental to democracy. I think citizens should be guaranteed access to the government documents that effect their lives. In previous generations, Georgia's citizens had this access. Why is that changing now?

Forgive my tinfoil hat, but I can't help but think that there is something Orwellian about it...

[astonas]

Re: History? Eh, who needs it!: Georgia Closes State Archives

Thank you!

Even in a forum of highly intelligent people, it is reasonable to expect that many will not have experience with any given technical issue, and so need more information to reach an informed conclusion. I've never really needed to access original documents myself (unless that was the only form they were available in), and I imagine that others might be in a similar situation.

Thanks for providing some context!

And I can also understand the concern with the relative malleability of digital documents as well.

[lektrode]

Re: History? Eh, who needs it!: Georgia Closes State Archives

Thank you!

Even in a forum of highly intelligent people, it is reasonable to expect that many will not have experience with any given technical issue, and so need more information to reach an informed conclusion. I've never really needed to access original documents myself (unless that was the only form they were available in), and I imagine that others might be in a similar situation.

Thanks for providing some context!

And I can also understand the concern with the relative malleability of digital documents as well.

+1
even to the perhaps less-than-enlightened-as-thou is this particular concern (malleability) serious - since we've seen a great deal of activity from 'revisionist historians' - particularly in academia - so having the originals can be quite valuable - seeing as it would be impossible to know if anything was altered during the scan/recognize/edit/digitize process - but at some point, having to maintain general public access to hundreds of years of paper docs will get to the point of ridiculou$

so yeah, i also agree with the POV of the headline/comment being sensationalist.

and altho i do thank/appreciate Sutter for spelling out his objection, at some point the costs of all the nice to have, even necessary to have stuff will have to be accounted for and tough decisions made (vs simply jacking up taxes across the board to maintain the buracracy that undoubtably goes along with the archives and the rest of most state functions - most of which likely could be replaced with a database and a website) - perhaps it would be more sensible to have USER FEES levied upon those who need immediate access to hundreds of years worth of paper records (since i cant imagine why most residents/taxpayers would need such, so why should they have to pay for the activities of the few?)

[Sutter Cane]

Re: History? Eh, who needs it!: Georgia Closes State Archives

having to maintain general public access to hundreds of years of paper docs will get to the point of ridiculou$

They somehow manage to do it in Europe, despite having a significantly longer timeframe to work with!

i cant imagine why most residents/taxpayers would need such, so why should they have to pay for the activities of the few?

If your grandfather wanted to research a government document that effected his life, he went to the archives and looked it up.

Soon, in Georgia, if you want to do the same, you will have to make an appointment with one of the few people left working there, perhaps for a time far in the future. Your level of access will be limited by having to make an appointment, the lack of staff, the reduced hours, etc. Now, given your post, it would also include a hefty fee.

You may think me hopelessly naive, or that I spent too much time in civics class, but I think that even if you never make use of these records yourself, they are still vital to our democracy. I am in favor of transparency in government. My initial post may have struck you as hyperbolic, but your quote above highlights exactly what I am talking about as far as being "anti-public sector". Access to government records has traditionally been egalitarian - they are a public good, the expense of providing access to government records is one that we all share as citizens. Charging some users would make what should be a fundamental right of citizenship, the ability of citizens to access the records of their government, dependent on income. With a dash of Orwell and Kafka thrown in, besides.

Personally, I would love for part of EJ's TECI idea to include digitization of government and historical records...

[lektrode]

Re: History? Eh, who needs it!: Georgia Closes State Archives

with all due respect mr Cane... (and i certainly wouldnt think you naive)

They somehow manage to do it in Europe, despite having a significantly longer timeframe to work with!

and one can only wonder/marvel how much their buracracy costs to do so - and i'm fairly sure they would have titles such as:
minister of archival services...
vice minister of archival services...
director of archival services...
assistant director of archival services...
deputy director of archival services
secratary to the director of archival services...
deputy secratary to the director of archival services...
all with 'masters degrees in archival science' with everybody making a 100grand/year = WHEEEEEEEE!!!!! aint this fu`un?

and THEN there'd be rank n file archivists, all of which would be no doubt unionized and likely make significantly more than the equiv working class in the private sector does = read more than the avg/typical taxpayers themselves do...

and since they're in the EU - oh i dunno, like maybe france? likely get 2months of vacation and sick time

but yeah - i think having good archives is a great idea - but common sense ought to apply and the private sector genally achieves the same results at far less cost.

If your grandfather wanted to research a government document that effected his life, he went to the archives and looked it up.

Soon, in Georgia, if you want to do the same, you will have to make an appointment with one of the few people left working there, perhaps for a time far in the future. Your level of access will be limited by having to make an appointment, the lack of staff, the reduced hours, etc. Now, given your post, it would also include a hefty fee.

'hefty' as in: the cost to provide such service to the scant few who would require such services?
like maybe lawyers such as trust types, real estate specialists, developers, engineering/consultants
who are billing somebody hundreds of dollars/hour for their research?
or perhaps mere 'hobbiest genealogists' with lots of free time on their hands....

You may think me hopelessly naive, or that I spent too much time in civics class, but I think that even if you never make use of these records yourself, they are still vital to our democracy. I am in favor of transparency in government. My initial post may have struck you as hyperbolic, but your quote above highlights exactly what I am talking about as far as being "anti-public sector". Access to government records has traditionally been egalitarian - they are a public good, the expense of providing access to government records is one that we all share as citizens. Charging some users would make what should be a fundamental right of citizenship, the ability of citizens to access the records of their government, dependent on income. With a dash of Orwell and Kafka thrown in, besides.

well maybe i didnt spend enough time in civics, but coming from a place called The Live Free or Die State, i think that those who use gov services should pay for them in direct proportion to their impact on the costs of providing such services.

and income of the citizenry hasnt a damn thing to do with it.

since there's no such thing as 'free' gov services.
We The People pay thru the nose BECAUSE the political class would have us believe they are 'giving us' something for nuthin - like assistant deputy directors of archival services and their secrataries....

Personally, I would love for part of EJ's TECI idea to include digitization of government and historical records...

and a Big +1 to that.
then we could get rid of most of the buracracy and costs associated with access to public records!
like i said, most of these 'filling up file cabinet' services could be provided by a database and a website.

see?
we really can agree on stuff if we look for ways to satisfy the need, while denying the buracracy 'their' power to deny US the access.

[dcarrigg]

Re: History? Eh, who needs it!: Georgia Closes State Archives

Many states have digitized a good chunk of state archives. Even NH keeps the archives open.

In regards to Georgia, something strange is going on. When one looks at their budget, one sees $2.5M per year going to a 501(c)3 called The University Financing Foundation Incorporated.

My guess is that they are cutting back staff this hard due to a 3% budget cut because they got themselves wrapped up in an overly complicated building deal with a series of non-profits and developers.

So now they have a fancy new building with nobody to staff it, and the public loses access.

I mean, look at this 171,000 sqft building. It's heating and cooling costs alone come to $200k/yr. It replaces the old building built in 1965.



They built a new building with an initial price tag of $30M (ended up being $41M) in 2004 that by 2011 was only open to the public on Fridays and Saturdays due to budget cuts. And now it's a $41M building that can be accessed only "by appointment." Maybe a $10M building that was purchased by appropriation and not financed would have allowed them to be open 7 days per week even today?

In any rightly run state, this wouldn't happen.

It's not that expensive to maintain, curate and offer the public access to archives. It's the sweetheart fancy building deals that sink budgets. I keep trying to sink this point home, and it takes a little bit to research, but it's always there. When things look amiss, there's usually a sweetheart building deal attached to an even more sweetheart financing deal. They paid more last year for the building that everything else combined. I'm sure there's some suitable space in the state that would be a lot less expensive.

[flintlock]

Re: History? Eh, who needs it!: Georgia Closes State Archives

They do the same thing with parks. Relatively small budgets are cut to the bone, so they can continue to fund programs that benefit more influential interests. Its just politics as usual.

[lektrode]

Re: History? Eh, who needs it!: Georgia Closes State Archives

same thing happened in NH - the spiffy new carroll county courthouse is a classic example of what youre writing about - apparently concieved in the grip of the FIre/fraud haydaze, they now have a shiny new edifice with no money to staff it...

the good news (in NH), if there is any in this tale - is that The Budget determines whether or not it CAN be staffed - not some 'political consideration' (union contracts etc) that forces scarce resources to be spent regardless of whether the money is there. since the first thing that typically happens when the budget crunch invariably happens, is that what gets cut FIRST is things that impact the public immediately (while the deputy directors and their secrataries somehow manage to escape the knife, like what happens in most of the blue states)

would've been very interesting to see how that all went down and/or the impact its had on the ability to deliver nec services to the public - altho was quite impressed with the probate function - couldntve been any faster or more efficient, IMHO.

i guess my point here is that if limited resources are available to get the job done - limited by not having sales/income taxed/broadbased revenue streams for the political-crony/industrial complex to play these games with - the public usually gets a better deal in the long run - even if immediate access via walkin is somewhat curtailed, one can still get what one is looking for.

but yer right dc, about how they got screwed there in GA - wonder who sold the land for the building and who's cuzzin got the construction contracts... and THEN who got the commish for the bond sales....

[flintlock]

Re: History? Eh, who needs it!: Georgia Closes State Archives

A lot of this is simply the economic game of musical chairs stopping. The music stopped and the money is no longer coming in like expected. Only a prudent leadership would not make assumptions of endless growth and prosperity. Yes, we all know government contracts are often built on sweetheart deals. A former business partner was on the receiving end of one of these deals, right up until 9/11, which changed everything. I still remember him laughing at me when I cautioned him to quit counting his chickens and cool it with the spending. A few years later he was bankrupt, borrowing money from me to eat. Some types are just risk takers. Its when they are in public office that it becomes dangerous for us all.

[lektrode]

Re: History? Eh, who needs it!: Georgia Closes State Archives

A lot of this is simply the economic game of musical chairs stopping. The music stopped and the money is no longer coming in like expected. Only a prudent leadership would not make assumptions of endless growth and prosperity. Yes, we all know government contracts are often built on sweetheart deals. A former business partner was on the receiving end of one of these deals, right up until 9/11, which changed everything. I still remember him laughing at me when I cautioned him to quit counting his chickens and cool it with the spending. A few years later he was bankrupt, borrowing money from me to eat. Some types are just risk takers. Its when they are in public office that it becomes dangerous for us all.

+1
they risk OUR finances for their own gain/re-election.

again this is why i say that NH's model is The Gold Standard on how the .gov should be run.

no broadbased slushfunds for the political class to scatter on the breeze.

one can lay the blame for our current sitch on various players, but IMHO, its the political class that deserves most of it - they are who has enabled the FIre/fraud and THEY are the ones who've let them get away with it - esp over the past 4 years....