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?
DIGITAL DYNAMICS
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.
SOFTWARE AND SERVICES FOR PERSONAL USE
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 (www.milifemap.com),
Recollect (www.recollect.com),
the personal history archive app, Timebox (www.timeboxapp.com),
or the Windows-based digital asset management system,
IMatch (www.photools.com/imatch-3-overview).
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 (http://www.onenote.com/),
Evernote (www.evernote.com)
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 (http://www.mailstore.com/)
for backing up, migrating and searching all our email
accounts. The Library of Congress offers advice on
archiving our emails at
www.digitalpreservation.gov/personalarchiving/email).
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 (http://www.family-historian.co.uk/], Who Do
You Think You Are (http://www.whodoyouthinkyouarestory.com)
or Ancestry.com (http://www.ancestry.com.au/).
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 (https://www.librarything.com/).
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.
THE WORK OF INSTITUTIONS
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
led to the accumulation of thousands of pieces,
including boxes of slides, 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].
Andy Warhol's 610 mystery parcels - his
time capsules – have drawn crowds that have paid to see
them being opened. Containing things like flyers,
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
called his curatorial
endeavours works of art. 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, mobisocial.stanford.edu/muse), 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 (www.mykvie.org)
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]
FUTURE DIRECTIONS
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 GenealogyBank.com 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 (https://open.abc.net.au/)
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.
Endnotes
[1] Bentley, P
“Mastering Digital Lives: Cultural Heritage
Institutions Tackle the Tower of Babel” (2010)
24 OLC 67.
[3] Personal Archiving:
Preserving our Digital Heritage, edited by
Donald T. Hawkins (Information Today, Medford,
NJ, 2013)
http://books.infotoday.com/books/Personal-Archiving.shtml
[4] Parks T, “My Life, Their Archive” The New
York Review of Books, 21 May 2014 http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2014/may/21/my-life-their-archive/
[10] Bacon F, The
works of Francis Bacon volume 9: The letters and
Life 2 (Cambridge University Press, 2011)
[14] The Digital
Beyond digital estate resources http://www.thedigitalbeyond.com/digital-estate-resources/
[15] Barrett H,
“Personal archives: Documenting the stories of
our lives”
Financial Times, 27 June 2014 http://www.ft.com
[17] Elmes S, “The
Secrets of Andy Warhol's Time Capsules”, BBC
News 9 September 2014 http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-29125003
[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) http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub159
[20] NSLA projects
http://www.nsla.org.au/projects/
[23] Smith-Yoshimura
K, Networking Names (Dublin, Ohio, OCLC
Research, 2009) http://www.oclc.org/content/dam/research/publications/library/2009/2009-05.pdf?urlm=162922
[30] Stanford
University Archives Self Archiving Legacy Tool
Kit https://sites.google.com/site/stanfordluminaryarchives/
[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
(http://museumsaustralia.org.au/userfiles/file/GLAM_Innovation_Study_September2014-Report_Final_accessible.pdf)
[34] Downes S, A
Lasting Record
(Sydney South, NSW: HarperCollins, 2013)
[38] StoryCorps @
your library http://www.programminglibrarian.org/storycorps/
[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,
www.thomson.com.au
