The Public Interest; American Libraries Magazine, January 23, 2022

 Sallyann Price , American Libraries Magazine ; The Public Interest

What does “public” mean in 2022?

"Merriam-Webster defines “public” as an adjective describing something “of, relating to, or affecting all or most of the people of a country, state, etcetera.” But as both academic and municipal libraries work to make their buildings, programming, and collections accessible to all patrons, they’re considering exactly what it means to be a public-serving institution.

What are the obligations of a public or private university to its local and global community? How have public libraries extended a sense of welcome to their patrons while safeguarding their rarest and most special collections? A panel of two public librarians and one academic librarian (moderated by architect Sindu Meier) discussed these questions during the “Curating for Inclusion” session at ALA’s LibLearnX virtual conference on January 23."

The coronavirus outbreak has exposed the deep flaws of Xi’s autocracy; The Guardian, February 9, 2020

Richard McGregor, The Guardian; The coronavirus outbreak has exposed the deep flaws of Xi’s autocracy

"The authoritarian strictures of the Chinese party state place a premium on the control of information in the name of maintaining stability. In such a system, lower-level officials have no incentive to report bad news up the line. Under Xi, such restrictions have grown tighter.

In Wuhan, Li and seven of his fellow doctors had been talking among themselves in an internet chat group about a new cluster of viral infections. They stopped after being warned by police. By the time the authorities reacted and quarantined the city, it was too late.

Li was neither a dissident nor a pro-democracy activist seeking to overthrow the Communist party. But he was risking jail to even discuss the virus. For in Xi’s China, the professional classes – doctors, lawyers, journalists and the like – all must subsume their skills and ethics to the political directives of the moment."

Pittsburgh City Council pushes forward on confidentiality measure; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 11/3/16

Adam Smeltz, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; Pittsburgh City Council pushes forward on confidentiality measure:

"Pittsburgh City Council forged ahead Wednesday with plans that could cost members triple-digit fines for leaking confidential details from closed-door meetings.

Council members voted 7-1 to advance comprehensive revisions for their own operating rules, setting up the 15-page proposal for a final vote Monday. Dissenting Councilwoman Darlene Harris lashed out against potential fines that could reach $500 for members who breach attorney-client privilege, saying the idea amounts to “a gag order.”"

Change at the Copyright Office; Publishers Weekly, 10/28/16

Andrew Albanese, Publishers Weekly; Change at the Copyright Office:

"Could Pallante’s departure spur Congress to finally appropriate sufficient resources to modernize the Copyright Office, which virtually everyone agrees is badly needed and long overdue? Hayden herself said she intends to build on the work Pallante did in terms of modernizing the Copyright Office for the digital age.

Or, might Pallante’s removal push Congress to consider removing the office from the Library of Congress altogether? Pallante was certainly held in high esteem by lawmakers. But sources expressed doubt that in the current political climate Congress would seek to create a new federal bureaucracy for copyright—which is the domain of Congress—that would be headed by a presidential appointee.

At the very least, ALA’s Sheketoff observed that Pallante’s removal suggests that the future of the U.S. Copyright Office is a high priority for at least one government official—Carla Hayden."

“A remarkable feat of collaboration”: The incredible story of how the Panama Papers came to be; The Conversation via Salon, 4/6/16

Richard Sambrook, The Conversation via Salon; “A remarkable feat of collaboration”: The incredible story of how the Panama Papers came to be:

"The ICIJ has been criticised by some on social media for not putting all the material into the open for anyone to look through. For open media evangelists this would be the most transparent action to take. However, with such a huge trove of documents, any media organisation will want to ensure they act legally and responsibly – putting the material through an editorial and legal filter before publishing.

This is one of the defining differences between professional media and open data activists. In broad terms these are literally stolen documents – can news organisations justify publishing them in the greater public interest? Will undue harm to innocent figures be caused by open publication? The public interest seems clear in this case – but without knowing what else the documents contain it is hard to make a judgement about whether they should all be placed online.

The Panama Papers – like The Pentagon Papers in the 1970s, like Wikileaks Iraq War logs and like the Snowden revelations – lifts the lid on the activities of political and business elites in ways which will be discussed for many years to come.

They are also a rich example of how investigative journalism increasingly works in the age of big data and global media. We can expect to see more leaks, more international media collaborations and more reaction from governments trying to clamp down on embarrassing revelations."

Small Town, Big Word, Major Issue; New York Times, 12/28/10

Robin Pogrebin, New York Times; Small Town, Big Word, Major Issue:

"Deaccessioning is the kind of word that makes eyes glaze over and can seem to be the preserve of dusty intellectuals and large museums. But it’s just a fancy name for the sale or giving away of art and artifacts by museums and other cultural organizations, and the dust-up here in this city of about 5,000 demonstrates that such debates occur in all kinds of places, big and small, where people feel protective about materials in their care.

With her personal gesture of protest in late September, Ms. Phillips stepped into a growing public controversy surrounding institutions that have sold or considered selling parts of their collections, which have been entrusted to them for the public’s benefit."