The Wolanski Foundation Project


Paper no 63









List of papers







The record of our lives in the Age of the Selfie: Developments in personal digital archiving

by Paul Bentley


Article originally published in Online Currents December 2014 and reprinted with kind permission of Thomson Reuters.


In the Age of the Selfie we have become our own paparazzo. The excitement of our next zuppa di mare is shared instantly across social media. Our gravestones may end up as a page on a website.         

Online Currents last explored personal digital archiving in 2010.[1] The article coincided with the first of an annual series of Personal Digital Archiving conferences.[2] Deliberations at the first two conferences have been consolidated in the book Personal Archiving. [3].  

What things are influencing the way we track our lives? And how are libraries, archives and museums responding to the challenge of capturing our personal stories?  


Consultant Seth Anderson, at the 2013 Personal Digital Archiving conference, says we assemble personal archives to manifest “our own existence through the materials we accumulate around ourselves as we look to exist beyond our lifetimes." We still record our lives on paper, but we are now also likely to leave behind a large quantity of material on computer drives inside our house and elsewhere. We begin the curatorial process, but at some point libraries, archives, museums and historical societies may become involved.  

In Personal Archiving, Sara Kim, from the University of Texas in Austin, surveys recent research on the topic. Some researchers have delved into the value of personal archives, highlighting emotional, social and historical dimensions. Some work has been done on the role of archives and the preservation challenges arising from the growth of digital material. In addition to research that has been undertaken in higher education and research information management and technology streams, cross-field and interdisciplinary explorations are taking place. 

Let’s look at some of the trends in more detail.  

Continuing interest in the lives of famous people has prompted debate about the way the lives of the famous are being curated. Libraries sometimes invite successful authors to sell their papers before they are written. Recently the Harry Ransom Centre at the University of Texas reputedly paid US$1.5 million for JM Coetzee’s papers and US$2 million for Ian McEwan’s literary archive. British writer and academic Tim Parks asks whether this is a good thing or a bad thing: if authors are involved in email conversations knowing their private thoughts will eventually become public, will it affect the way they express their thoughts? [4]  Rebecca Hunt, reviewing the diaries of Sir Earnest Shackleton and Captain Scott, reflects on the difference between creating and curating. Shackleton’s book South!, based on his diary, focused on his triumph rather than “the smaller, spikier details” of his ordeal. Scott's journal, retrieved after his death, contains “the reflexive frustration and turmoil of a man writing privately at the end of each day.” Scott didn’t have the opportunity to reassess his initial thoughts. Although his story is more intimate and more revealing, it is not the whole story.[5]  

Interest in the lives of ordinary people is growing. Sara Kim, in her survey, observes that the cultural value of ordinary individuals is becoming more apparent – there is a growing appreciation of “history from the bottom up” or micro-history. We see manifestations of this during World War I centenary celebrations. The State Library of New South Wales remembered footsloggers as heroes in the exhibition Portraits of War: the Crown Studios Project.[6]. Hugh White learnt about the “swift slide into war” in the log his grandfather kept as a midshipman on the HMS Centurion.[7]. 

The boundary between private and public lives is more blurred. The increased use of consultants, contractors and mobile working arrangements has muddied the definition of public and private records. Anil Dash, in a piece for Medium, urges better definitions of private and public information as a way of guarding against future abuses. “Understanding exactly what ‘public’ means is the only way to protect the public’s interest."[8]

Rights are navigated across a minefield. The Digital Beyond’s Evan Carroll, in Personal Archiving, writes about legal issues from the perspective of digital inheritance. The use of social media websites and cloud-based accounts has made it difficult to access them after people die. If our executors or relatives do manage to unlock the door to our documents, they may find sensitive information lurking in the shadows. They may want to protect our interests, but others may be less circumspect. The publication of Anne Frank’s unabridged diary recently caused a stir because it included a passage in which Frank writes about her sexual self-exploration. It was material her father had removed when the manuscript was prepared for publication in the 1940s.  

There are challenges ahead. In Personal Archiving, Danielle Conklin, from Cotton Gloves Research, observes that personal digital collections tend to be poorly organised, described and scanned. In the same book Microsoft Research’s Cathy Marshall says the personal digital archiving is a field that suffers from “benign neglect”. Personal data storage is becoming increasingly complex. Ownership and control of online assets is a messy business. People struggle with computer technology and the forest of digital content. The value of personal digital archives has met with scepticism. Without institutional intervention, it is difficult to predict what will survive and what won’t. New policies and strategies are needed in both public and private domains.


Although we haven’t yet jettisoned shelves, boxes, photograph albums and filing cabinets to help us organise, describe and store our paper trail, we now use an array of software and services to document our lives. Most of us have electronic files organised in directories on our computers. Depending on what we do, we may use a variety of programs and online services to help us organise our thoughts.  

We might, for example, use file hosting services such as Apple’s iCloud, Microsoft’s One Drive or Dropbox to back up and share files on our devices. We might be tempted to use alternative software and services such as Lifemap (, Recollect (, the personal history archive app, Timebox (, or the Windows-based digital asset management system, IMatch ( We might use specialised photo editing and sharing software and services such as  Google’s Picasa, Windows’ Photo Gallery or Instagram.  

If we have a research bent, we might be tempted to use Scrivener, an authoring and research tool that promises to “create order out of chaos."[9] If we are not convinced that creating order out of chaos can be achieved by organising our files in our operating system directory, other products we might turn to include Microsoft’s Onenote (, Evernote ( and Diigo (www.diigo,com). Springpad was another, but the fact that it closed down in May 2014 is a reminder that it is wise to store our stuff in two places and to clarify what will happen when cloud services shut up shop.  

Some would argue that many of our notes are not worth preserving. The English philosopher and statesman, Francis Bacon, was one who was sceptical about the value of his notes after he died: “one man's notes will little profit another, because one man's conceit doth so much differ from another's; and also because the bare note itself is nothing so much worth as the suggestion it gives the reader."[10] Our descendants may welcome our suggestions. Anyone who has delved into the lives of his or her ancestors will know that minor details sometimes turn out to be major revelations.
Our use of emails for conversing has encouraged the return of writing as a preferred form of expression.
Some of us may regard the accidental loss of our emails as a blessing in disguise. But, if we are concerned about the legacy of our life and thoughts, we might be tempted to use services like MailStore ( for backing up, migrating and searching all our email accounts. The Library of Congress offers advice on archiving our emails at  

If we have a personal website and use social media, we might make use of the native backup tools within services like Facebook, Google and Twitter. To manage our genealogical threads, we might use, say, Family Historian (], Who Do You Think You Are ( or ( 

Parts of our book collection may be of interest to our descendents, although passing them on has become a challenge as we acquire more e-books. The Library of Congress decided there was value in putting together again the 4000 titles of Thomas Jefferson’s library and has been on the hunt for an elusive 250 titles that no one seems to have.[11]. Marilyn Munro’s book collection was auctioned by Christies in 1999, but the list of what was on her shelves adds to our appreciation of who she was.[12] We lesser mortals might be tempted to leave behind traces of what we read by using LibraryThing ( 

As we prepare for death, the advice of Christina DesMarais makes perfect sense: include instructions about our digital material in our will, appoint an online executor, and, if we don’t intend to leave our passwords behind in a little book, use web services such as Legacy Locker and SecureSafe instead.[13] Evan Carroll and John Romano, who describe themselves as “thought-provokers in the budding digital afterlife industry”, list on their website more than 50 online services offering digital estate planning, posthumous email delivery and online memorials. Some offer to host our digital life for “all eternity.” One will help us store a DNA sample as “a free back-up of [our] mind and genetic code.” Another offers to record our voice to ensure that future generations will be able to hear us speak.[14].

Microsoft’s Richard Banks, in Personal Archiving, says we have to think of new ways for passing on our digital legacy. He has worked on four experimental devices that are given prominence as physical objects on our bookshelves. He argues that digital content boxes  such as Shoebox, Timecard, Digital Slide Viewer and Backup Box will be easier to find and easier for our loved ones to carry them away after we die.  


In our 2010 article, Online Currents highlighted several initiatives. The Digital Lives Research Project, led by British Library, had drawn attention to the complexity of personal practices and the high risk of losing whole swathes of personal and family histories. For curators and archivists, it concluded, there was unlikely to be a one-size-fits-all approach. The JISC-funded Personal Archives Accessible in Digital Media (PARADIGM) project had recommended more effective engagement with creators of records.  

The volume of material has challenged the art of selection. As libraries continue to feel their way towards future approaches, with computer drives in the world now holding an estimated 4 zettabytes, the exponential growth of digital content has been accompanied by stories of accidental loss and deliberate whitewashing of online information. It is not often possible to predict the value of things. 

Vivien Leigh’s dry cleaning receipts, recently acquired as part of her collection by the Victorian and Albert Museum, have been promoted as an unexpectedly useful source about mid-20th century haute couture.[15]. 

Things that the American author John Updike decided to throw away because he thought they were of little public value were retrieved by one of his neighbours, Paul Moran. Moran’s regular raids on Updike’s rubbish bins , discarded drafts of stories, White House invitations, Christmas cards, love letters, and floppy disks. They are now known as “the other John Updike archive”, a complement to the official collection of Updike’s papers selectively assembled by Updike and deposited in Harvard’s Houghton Library.[16]. 

lyers, junk mail, fan letters, gallery invitations, unopened letters, solicitations for work, LPs, a lump of concrete, pornographic assemblages by Warhol's friends and associates, used postage stamps, toenail clippings, dead ants, a mummified foot and used condoms, Warhol Someone paid US$30,000 to be the one to open the last time capsule.[17].   

Selection has been recognised as a basic function of GLAM sector institutions for more than a century. Before the widespread adoption of computers, F Gerald Ham in 1984 attacked as profligate, in an age of overabundant information, the notion of saving everything. Archivists must pick and choose.[18]. 

Acquisition processes are being re-jigged. The Council of Library and Information Resources has published a report on the acquisition of born-digital material by repositories. Its suggested steps will help reduce surprises from donor idiosyncrasies, sensitive information in emails, legally protected private files and hidden content. Although well-formed acquisition policies and practices may alleviate ambiguities, however, the unexpected will continue to challenge and surprise repositories.[19].   

During the past four years, National and State Libraries Australasia (NSLA) has explored challenges of processing personal and other archival collections through its archival collections, digital preservation and digital skills projects.[20]. Linda Newbown’s The Lists Project: Making Collection Lists Searchable Through Trove (November 2010) investigated ways of making “hidden” documentary heritage material. Faster Access to Archival Collections in NSLA Libraries: Guidelines for Arrangement and Description Beyond the Collection/Record Group Level (March 2011) focused on control beyond collection level records, particularly with reference to collections of personal papers. Susan Thomas’s Guidelines for Library Staff Assisting Donors to Prepare Their Personal Digital Archives for Transfer to NSLA Libraries (November 2011) has advice on acquisition principles and processes, including tips for preserving personal data.

To assist thinking about ways of dealing with sensitive information in digital collections, the Australian National Data Service has guidelines on its website for publishing and sharing sensitive data in the research field.[21].

Systems and data management standards are being refined. The Virtual Information Authority File, for example, managed by OCLC in partnership with 36 institutions, captures and refines tens of millions of personal and corporate names represented in more than 130 million authority and bibliographic records. [22]. The project was informed by the earlier Networking Names report by Karen Smith-Yoshimura, which identified components of a Cooperative Identities Hub.[23].  

Data mining tools for emails are being developed. Jason Zalinger, Nathan Freier and Ben Shneiderman, in Personal Archiving, describe the techniques for extracting a rich narrative from the files of Professor Shneiderman, where events, places, people, unusual words, common phrases, and moments of conflict form part of the story. The MUSE program (Memories USing Email,, developed by Sudheendra Hangal and others, creates automated summaries of emails and is being commercialised by Stanford Libraries to give readers access to email archives of eminent individuals. The University of Illinois Archives is developing for use by institutional repositories and other academic information services the open source software myKive ( to assist aggregation of desktop files, emails and social media.  

Cultural heritage institutions have begun to educate the public about personal digital archiving. The Library of Congress’s digital preservation website has extensive information, including publications, instructional videos, links to digital preservation tools and case studies.[24]The publication Perspectives on Personal Digital Archiving consolidates some of this information.[25]Australian examples include the National Film and Sound Archive, which has information on caring for photographs audio and video recordings.[26] State Records NSW has details of the tools and technologies that underpin the approach of State Records.[27].

The Library of Congress is also leading a push for other cultural heritage organisations to build their own public outreach programs. At the 2013 Personal Digital Archiving conference, Noah Lenstra, drawing on studies in four mid-western public libraries, put the case for connecting personal archiving with local library and family history services. Christine Pittsley has written about a state-wide collaboration in Connecticut that is using World War I celebrations as the catalyst.[28] In April 2014, the Library of Congress, in partnership with National Digital Stewardship Alliance, conducted a survey of personal digital archiving in public service libraries, archives and museums to guide future planning and the allocation of resources.[29]   

Special environments are under the microscope. Allysa Stern Cahoy, in Personal Archiving, considers practices in the academic environment. The time is ripe, she says, for academic libraries to begin formalising self-archiving strategies for faculty and students. Institutional repositories exist, but attention must also be paid to developing educational initiatives for users. A number of universities have begun to explore options. The University of Rochester has produced a report promoting the need for an institutional repository platform to make it easier for users to archive and publish their research. Stanford University has developed the Self Archiving Legacy Tool Kit as a web-based service for faculty self-archiving.[30]  


New approaches for personal archiving may, in the words of the MacArthur Foundation’s Jeff Ubois, “help us fulfil the Confucian responsibility of being good ancestors to our descendents.” Future directions are likely to revolve around three major needs and opportunities

More research

The Internet Archives’ Brewster Kahle, in Personal Archiving, puts it plainly: there is no consensus yet on how to protect our personal collections. Currently we lack the tools and approaches to save our own histories.  

Efforts to date have only been exploratory says Coalition of Networked Information director Clifford Lynch in the same book. Personal digital archiving as a field still awaits clear definition. Custody and storage of this information is very messy and is getting more complex. Individual back-up practices await more effective technical solutions. We need to resolve the ambiguity of shared materials and spaces, including material contributed to public enterprises, and in the complex network of extended families and diasporas. Personal digital archives are an optional, even accidental, part of collective cultural record. There are questions about the extent to which genealogical and other private material belongs to the public infrastructure, how they governed, and whom they represent. 

In another chapter, the Internet Archive’s Aaron Ximm concludes there is a need for active personal digital archiving as a hedge against the untenable reliance on for-profit institutions and ephemeral web presences. Although the Internet Archive undertakes research on the topic, it does not offer personal digital archiving services. There is a need for commitments by other institutions and the development of related capabilities.  

According to Jeff Ubois, research efforts in the field are likely to focus on five areas: the cost of digitising and storing digital material, responsibilities of commercial and non-commercial sectors in preserving digital archives, the relationships and responsibilities of individuals and institutions, the design and use of technology, and questions revolving around culture and expectations.

Capacity and productivity

Future approaches are partly dependent on sorting out broader productivity questions within the GLAM sector.  

Sorting out questions will partly involve negotiating government policies that encourage the sector to take two steps forward, then one step backwards. In Australia, there is a degree of uncertainty about the federal Coalition’s current plans for the digital economy.[31] 

Reports by the National and State Libraries Australasia have already been highlighted in this article for their relevance to personal digital archiving. Three other reports are worth mentioning as essential contexts. In 2010, Marie-Louise Ayres’ discussion paper, Faster Access to Archival Collection in NSLA Libraries, reviewed economies and efficiencies in the management of unique materials in libraries, archives and museums. She made note of the lack of standardisation of practice and performance across NSLA libraries for a wide range of activities and the inadequacy of information to assess processing performance. Backlogs are very significant. Libraries are concerned about their inability to manage born-digital collections. Ayres makes 28 recommendations to improve planning and performance. If resources cannot be increased, she wrote, NSLA libraries need to consider changing collection development policies, processing policies and practices to avoid paralysis and a sense of hopelessness. Joint guidelines need to be developed for suppliers of born‐digital records. Staffing resources need to be shifted to pre‐transfer activities such as donor liaison. Most donors need to give their collections already boxed and listed so that every receipt is usable soon after transfer. 

NSLA’s Digitisation Research Project report (2011) evaluated digital costs and funding options for mass digitisation endeavours in the environment of Australia’s federated system, a multiplicity of GLAM sector bodies, and a public policy agenda that is threatened by political instability. It calls for a national digitisation policy, leadership from at least one national institution or GLAM sector body, and more evidence to promote the benefits of  mass digitisation initiatives. Picturing the Future, prepared by the NLSA Pictures Project Group in July 2013, proposes development of mass digitisation  approaches that “shift the relationship and sequencing from item level collection description and digitisation to more cost efficient and fast methods.” The report, Digital Preservation Environment Maturity Matrix, prepared by David Pearson and Libor Coufal in November 2013, encourages member libraries to benchmark their progress and capabilities in the digital realm.  

Joining a long line of reports urging more effective concerted action by the Australian governments, galleries, libraries, archives and museums is a report published in 2014 by the Centre for Broadband Innovation, CSIRO and The Smart Services CRC. It hopes to promote “deep transformation” of a sector often marked by “deep reluctance to let go of the traditional positions of authority.” Its transformative recommendations re-package past rhetoric about funding, national collaborative frameworks, organisational change and the development of skills.[32]

Citizen archivists

Future directions will no doubt harness the potential of citizen archivists and volunteers. The term citizen archivist has a revolutionary ring to it that conjures up the transformation from the Ancien Régime to the reign of terror. In today’s digital environment, though, there is nothing to fear because Clay Shirky has reminded us that the world of ubiquitous computing and people with spare time have created social capital with the potential for producing a compound interest.

Private collectors continue to make up for the oversights of institutions. David Henderson’s systematic off-air recordings of Alistair Cooke’s program, Letter from America, recently discovered on Henderson’s farm in Warwickshire, made up for the loss of the programs in the BBC Archives.[33] In Australia, the discovery of Roy Preston’s acetate tapes of ABC broadcasts of the young, widely-acclaimed American pianist William Kapell, who was killed in a plane crash on his way back to San Franciso in 1953, made up for the fact the ABC either made no recordings or disposed of any it did make.[34].

The Internet Archive’s Alexis Rossi has advocated a new framework and set of tools to turn citizens into curators. The Internet Archive has 19 petabytes of data, including more than 2 million books, 430 billion web pages, 3 million hours of television, and 500,000 software applications, but only a small proportion – about 8% -- is uploaded by users. To encourage their users and the users of other institutions, she says we need to design new interfaces and tools to help upload material, refine permission controls, create schemas, improve search mechanisms and promote further collaboration.[35]. 

Widespread interest in family history and genealogy has encouraged institutional collaboration. In March 2014 OCLC and the Church of Latter-day Saint’s FamilySearch International formed a partnership that gives ready access to local histories, biographies, and other records of genealogical value in the databases of both organisations.[36]. With the support of volunteers, Family Search International is working with to digitise a billion obituaries in US newspapers from 1730 to the present.[37] Canadiana and the Library and Archives Canada have formed a partnership to digitise microfilm in library and archive’s collections, including genealogical records. The Singapore Memory Project, a partnership of library institutions and other stakeholders, offers an account to every Singaporean and invites them to deposit text, audio, video and image files. The American Library Association (ALA), with support from the Institute of Museum and Library Services, has formed a partnership with StoryCorps to connect libraries with oral history resources and training using a mobile recording studio.[38].

In Australia, ABC Open program ( is our example of the ALA-StoryCorps initiative. The use of volunteers to correct text in the National Library of Australia’s Trove database of digitised newspapers has contributed to the quality of the nation’s information resources. At a state level, the State Library of Queensland’s Memory Project, in partnership with local public libraries and other enterprises, provides advice, advocacy, tools, training and other services to stimulate management of collections throughout the state.[39] The partnership between the National Library of Australia with Museums Australia to make records from the Victorian Collections project searchable via Trove draws attention to objects held by community museums and has the potential for improved access to personal collections in history societies and museums in the state of Victoria.[40]

Such collaborative endeavours may yield benefits beyond their initial purpose. Iceland's obsession with genealogy, for example, has led to scientific breakthroughs. Its population of 320,000 people is descended from a small clan of Celtic and Viking settlers. In 1997, neurologist Kári Stefánsson and developer Fridrik Skulason created an online database of Íslendingabók (The Book of Icelanders), which has genealogical information on 95 percent of Icelanders from the past three centuries. Recently a group of engineering students at the University of Iceland connected the database to an “incest prevention” app that enables users to bump their phones together to determine whether they share a common ancestor before they hop into bed. The pre-occupation with heredity and the accumulation of genealogical data has led to discoveries in genetic research. Stefánsson claims to have discovered how specific genetic mutations affect a person's chances of having everything from Alzheimer’s to blond hair, identified a cancer-causing mutation and uncovered a genetic component to longevity.[41]

In the spirit of Confucius

The spirit of Confucius will no doubt be in the room when delegates gather at the next Personal Digital Archiving conference in New York City on 24-26 April 2015. 

If anyone were well placed to guide the conversations it would be David Bearman, who has led thinking about electronic archives during the past 30 years. In 1989 he urged us to admit to the futility of efforts to accumulate a comprehensive and unbiased record for future generations.[42] In 1994, he argued for electronic files to be captured at the moment they were created irrespective of the recordkeeping activities that followed. What happened afterwards was a question of managing the moments of risk.[43] In 2006, after exploring the moments of risk in the life cycle of records, he commented on differences in the way the archival community and libraries approach digital preservation. Library digital preservation projects, he wrote, have tended to emphasise the construction of trusted repositories, federated archives and the long-term access of electronic records after they are deposited. Most of the moments of risk are invisible to libraries.[44] 

We are responsible for preserving our digital lives. Organisations, including cultural heritage institutions, have responsibility for capturing electronic records in accordance with their selection and retention policies. Routine back-ups in the cloud may provide the insurance to cover the failures in both spheres.


[1] Bentley, P “Mastering Digital Lives: Cultural Heritage Institutions Tackle the Tower of Babel” (2010) 24 OLC 67.

[2] Personal Digital Archiving conferences, 2010-2104:

[3] Personal Archiving: Preserving our Digital Heritage, edited by Donald T. Hawkins (Information Today, Medford, NJ, 2013)

[4] Parks T, “My Life, Their Archive”  The New York Review of Books, 21 May 2014

[5] Hunt R, “What Do the Diaries of Shackleton and Scott Reveal?” The Guardian, 22 March 2014.

[6] Fortescue E, “New Exhibition at the State Library Shows Our Past War Heroes, Frozen in Time”, Daily Telegraph 24 June 2014.

White H, “Battleship View of the Days the World Changed Forever, and a Boy Went to War”, Sydney Morning Herald 28 July 2014

[8] Dash A, “What Is Public? It’s So Simple, Right?” Medium 24 July 2014 ,

[10] Bacon F, The works of Francis Bacon volume 9: The letters and Life 2 (Cambridge University Press, 2011)

[11] Davies N, “Where are Thomas Jefferson’s books?” Melville House, 4 June 2014

[12] Gertz, SJ “Marilyn Munro: Avid Reader, Writer & Book Collector”, Booktryst 8 October 2010

[13] DesMarais C, What Happens to Your Online Accounts After You Die, Time 26 August  2014

[14] The Digital Beyond digital estate resources

[15] Barrett H, “Personal archives: Documenting the stories of our lives Financial Times, 27 June 2014

[16] LaFrance A, “The Man Who Made Off With John Updike’s Trash”, The Atlantic  28 August 2014

[17] Elmes S, “

[18] Ham FG, “Archival Choices: Managing the Archival Record in an Age of Abundance” American Archivist V47, no 2, Winter 1984: 11-22.

[19] Redwine G and others, Born Digital: Guidance for Donors, Dealers, and Archival Repositories (Washington DC. Council of Library and Information Resources, October 2013. CLIR pub 159)

[20] NSLA projects

[22] Hickey T and Toves J, “Managing Ambiguity in VIAF”, D-Lib Magazine (2014) v20, n 7/8,

[23] Smith-Yoshimura K, Networking Names (Dublin, Ohio, OCLC Research, 2009)

[24] Library of Congress Personal Archiving and The Signal

[25] Library of Congress Perspectives on Personal Digital Archiving (Washington, DC: Library of Congress National Digital Information Infrastructure Program, 2013)

[26] Gonzalez M “Make Sure Your Collections Outlive You!” National Film and Sound Archive blog 21 July 2014 (

[27] State Records NSW “How We Do Digital Archiving at State Records”, 28 July 2014

[28] Pittsley, C “Remembering World War One: A Model for Sharing History/Preserving Memories” Knight Foundation 30 September 2014

[29] NDIIPP/NDSA Survey on Personal Digital Archiving in Public Service Libraries, Archives and Museums

[30] Stanford University Archives Self Archiving Legacy Tool Kit  

[31] Pennington S, “Federal Government Accused of Neglecting Digital Agenda” Sydney Morning Herald 30  September 2014 (

[32] Mansfield T, Winter C, Griffith C, Dockerty A, Brown T, Innovation Study: Challenges and Opportunities for Australia’s Galleries, Libraries, Archives, and Museums, Australian Centre for Broadband Innovation, CSIRO and Smart Services Co-operative Research Centre, September 2004 (

Alistair Cooke: Long-lost Letters from 1970s America” BBC News, 30 March 2014

[34] Downes S, A Lasting Record (Sydney South, NSW: HarperCollins, 2013)

[35] Rossi A, “Building Libraries Together: New Tools for Communities to Help Build Digital Libraries of the Future” Knight Foundation, 30 September 2014

[36] OCLC, “Genealogists Can Now Find FamilySearch and WorldCat Records Through Both Online Resources

[38] StoryCorps @ your library

[40] Museums Australia (Victoria)

[41] Khazan O, “How Iceland's Genealogy Obsession Leads to Scientific Breakthroughs” The Atlantic, 7 October  2014

[42] Bearman D, Archival Methods (Pittsburgh, Archives and Museum Informatics, 1989)

[43] Bearman D. “Archival Strategies” American Archivist vol 58, no 4 (Fall 1994):374-407

[44] Bearman D, “Moments of Risk: Identifying Threats to Electronic Records” Archivaria no 62, 2006

Non-commercial viewing, copying, printing and/or distribution or reproduction of this article or any copy or material portion of the article is permitted on condition that any copy of material portion thereof must contain copyright notice referring "Copyright ©2013 Lawbook Co t/a Thomson Legal & Regulatory Limited." Any commercial use of the article or any copy or material portion of the article is strictly prohibited. For commercial use, permission can be obtained from Lawbook Co, Thomson Legal & Regulatory Limited, PO Box 3502, Rozelle NSW 2039,


 About usWhat's newSite map | Searching  | Managing  | Learning  |  Library |  Research 

  Contact us | Home  

© 2015 The Wolanski Foundation Project

 Email web manager.  URL:

Page last updated:18 May 2015