Reading Report 3: "The Future of Libraries"

http://www.futuristspeaker.com/2006/11/the-future-of-libraries/

Throughout history, many significant documents have been preserved thanks to libraries, including the many works of Leonardo da Vinci which were tragically passed from place to place over the years. Andrew Carnage also played an important role in the shaping of libraries because of his funding the building of 2,509 libraries, 1,689 of which were built in the US. Libraries were “centers of information” and played a role in preserving and storing manuscripts, art, and other important documents. The role of libraries, however, is changing, and these changes ca be categorized into 10 trends.

The first trend talks about how growing technologies and communication systems are changing the way people access information. The second looks at how the technologies we use today, will one day be replaced with better ways of storing and receiving data. The Third examines how we as a society have not yet discovered an “ultimate way to minimize a “small storage”, creating room for growth. The fourth talks about how the technology and programs we use to actually search for information will become increasingly more advanced and difficult. The fifth examines how libraries will need to be able to keep up with its patrons in providing resources or “needs” as quickly and they are appearing. The sixth trend talks about technologies moving towards a verbal command based society, removing the need for keyboards or other manual input devices, while the seventh examines the growing need for information world wide. The eighth examines how the expansion of global systems broadens the horizons for information access. The ninth examines how society is transitioning from a product-based economy to an experience based economy, while the tenths talks about the change of libraries from centers of learning to centers of cultures.

Article Report 3: "Suicide class for terminally ill cancelled by Vancouver library"

CBC News
Monday September 21, 2009.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/09/21/bc-suicide-class-vancouver-public-library.html

The Vancouver Public Library has told an Australian group that it can't use the library's public meeting rooms to hold a suicide workshop for the terminally ill.” The suicide workshop was to be hosted by the group Exit International, founded by Dr. Phillip Nitschke. Nitschke admits that the workshops are controversial but claims that his organization’s only intention is to “to help the terminally ill decide when and how they die.” The Library sought legal advice after city librarian Paul Whitney, cancelled the reservation for a public room. They were told that “in all likelihood this program would be in contravention of Section 241 of the Criminal Code and that states that it is an indictable offence to counsel or aid or abet any person to commit suicide” the penalty for which being a maximum sentence if convicted is 14 years, whether a suicide takes place or not. Whitney’s statement on the matter was "Freedom of speech and access to information are core values for us, but having said that, the library was not prepared to be party to a probable criminal offence, which could result in the loss of life”.

Personally, in this article, I am in support of the Librarians and their denying access to a suicide workshop. The way I always considered rights was if you stretched your arms out wide and spun in a circle, that was al the rights that you had; but as soon as your hands touched someone else’s, both of your rights(arm lengths) would be constricted so that you could freely rotate( have rights) .

Article Report 2 "Senate Republicans Aim to Stop FCC's Open Internet Proposal"

Fawn Johnson
DOW JONES NEWSWIRES
September 21, 2009
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20090921-710905.html


Federal Communications Chairman Julius Genachowski has proposed a new “Open Internet” policy, to which several Republican Senators are against. Mr. Genachowski revealed his open Internet proposal on Monday in a speech at the Brookings Institution. The rules would “prevent Internet companies like Comcast Corp. (CMCSA), Verizon Communications Inc. (VZ) or AT&T Inc. (T) from selectively blocking or slowing certain Web content and would require providers to disclose how they manage their networks.“ In an attempt to stop it, “Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, on Monday introduced an amendment to a spending bill currently being debated in the Senate that would bar the FCC from using its federal funds to advance the Internet rules.“ Mr. Genachowski’s plan would also expand open internet to the wirless industry, which has never before faced the same policies as companies “providing cable, fiber, or DSL-type connections.” Among supporters of the amendment are Sens. John Ensign, R-Nev., Sam Brownback, R-Kansas, David Vitter, R-La., Jim DeMint, R-S.C., and John Thune, R-S.D.

In this instance, I am in support of the Republicans. I believe that it is important for companies to retain control of their own policies, and not to allow too many government interventions, which in this case, might eventually cause problems for high bandwidth users. While this proposal is a victory for those supporting the principle of open, unregulated internet access, it also marks the end of the flat-rate internet access. With open internet, the response will most likely be to make consumers pay for what we are actually using, so all those high bandwidth videos and Skype are going to cost us.

Reading Report 2: “Can Wikipedia Ever Make the Grade”

Read, Brock
Chronicle of Higher Education; 10/27/2006, Vol. 53 Issue 10, pA31-A36.

The debate on the reliably of encyclopedias that allow any users to edit the content, is generally split between two factions in the academic world; whether to ignore it or to contribute to it. Wikipedia is currently the “Internet’s hottest information source”. Alexander M.C. Halavais, who is an assistant professor of communications at Quinnipiac College admits to being one of the scholars who contributes his own expertise to articles on the site from time to time.

Two years ago, Mr. Halavais tested an theory on Wikipedia and under an alias, submitted false information on 13 different articles (including one about “a short-lived political party in New Brunswick, Canada, the professor wrote of a politician felled by ‘a very public scandal relating to an official Party event at which cocaine and prostitutes were made available.’”) expecting them to remain unnoticed for a time. He was surprised however to find that in less than three hours after his posting, all of his facts had been deleted by members patrolling the changes to sites. Even with this incident, there are still many who say that “Wikipedia devalues the notion of expertise itself.

Among the skeptics is Michael Gorman, the immediate past president of the American Library Association, who says "The problem with an online encyclopedia created by anybody is that you have no idea whether you are reading an established person in the field or someone with an ax togrind,".

I believe that as an encyclopedia, Wikipedia is very resourceful because there are many people who just spend their time monitoring the pages and checking facts. For anything thing of academic nature, there are many, many other sources that are credited by sources with expertise.

Reading Report 1 "Web Hoaxes, Counterfeit Sites, and Other Spurious Information on the Internet"

There a number of different types of hoax sites including: counterfeit, malicious, product, fictions, parodies/spoofs, hacks, and disinformation. While most of these are not harmful, they can still cause confusion, anger and potentially serious problems, especially regarding malicious and counterfeit sites. There are many sites that disguise themselves as information, but then prove later to have ulterior motives a prime example being malicious hate sites and hacked sites, which purposefully distribute misinformation. Martinlutherking.org is a well known hater site, which posts pro-white information on the civil rights movement. Sites also mislead users by using addresses like .org or by claiming to be partners with established organizations.

Sites that run on user submitted information, such as “Wikipedia”, take precautions to verify the validity of information. Health websites are particularly susceptible to misinformation, since less informed and susceptible people are mislead by advertisements for new age “cures”. September 11th brought about its own surge of misleading information as thousands of fictitious charities were spread seeking to scam the grieving persons out of the money they thought thy were providing to relief organizations.


I personally enjoy a harmless spoof every now and again, the kind of sites that make us revaluate what society today holds as important. However, it is a real shame that there exists on the internet so much information that is totally false. If I am trying to look for information for a paper or project, I don’t want to be anywhere near sites that spread propaganda or only provide one specific view of an event. While I am in full support of the freedom of speech, libel and slander should not be included. On sites that are only educational, there should be a censorship that restricts false information.