Boomers – Winners or Losers in the Age of Technology?

Posted on October 3, 2010 by deedee

Postman’s theory of gains and losses is used as a framework through which issues facing the Baby Boom generation and its use of emerging text and communication technologies are examined. General attitudes toward technologies and specific motivations for and against the eventual uptake of skills and knowledge are addressed. For the purposes of this commentary, the Baby Boom generation is defined as having been born between 1946 and 1964. Similarly generations X, Y and Z are respectively defined as having been born between 1964 and 1981, 1982 and 1995, and 1996 and the present.

Baby Boomers are a unique generation in terms of how they view their relationship to the rapid evolution of technology. They span the digital divide, often unsure of the implications inherent in a decision to remain a technophobe or become a technophile (Postman, 1992). Boomers didn’t grow up with technology; O’Neill (2008) considers them to be ‘digital immigrants’, examining technology from an outsider’s perspective. The distinction between technophiles and technophobes illustrates Postman’s belief that there are winners and losers; gains and losses associated with the, “development and spread of computer technology.” (Postman, 1992, p.10) Postman’s stance of weighing the gains and losses associated with technology is relevant when examining the impact information technology is having on Boomers’ lives. However Postman’s theory is perhaps less applicable when examining the relationship subsequent generations (Generations X, Y and Z) have with emerging technologies. These generations have grown up fully immersed in information and communication technologies throughout their formative years—consideration of Postman’s gains and losses where they are concerned does not necessarily apply.

What has become apparent for Boomers is a pronounced shift in the balance of workplace power and mentorship away from themselves towards younger and less experienced members of subsequent generations, who have assumed the seat of power as it relates to technology. Innis focuses attention on knowledge monopolies, where “those who have control over the workings of a technology accumulate power and inevitably form a kind of conspiracy against those who have no access to the specialized knowledge made available by the technology.” (Postman, 1992, p.9) Members of generations X, Y and Z have a monopoly in the workplace when it comes to fluently using new technologies, leaving Boomers to fear that their accumulated decades of wisdom and experience will be lost if they are not able to match the speed of changing technologies and regain this lost power.

Change is the one, assured inevitability of technology (Postman, 1992). The last 25 years have seen a myriad of technologies introduced into the workplace. Postman further states that “such changes occur quickly, surely and, in a sense, silently… And it does not pause to tell us. And we do not pause to ask.” (Postman, 1992, p. 8, 9) With each new workplace technology comes a period of being an ‘unconscious incompetent’ for many Boomers. They lack the understanding around what new technologies can do, how they can be effectively used, and what the implications of employing these technologies might be. Soules (1996) writes that, “In order to understand any medium, we must attend not only to its physical characteristics, but also to the way in which it is employed and institutionalized.” (p. 2) Soules further notes that Harold Innis, “sees a dialectical relationship between society and technology.” (p. 2) Whether a Boomer chooses to remain a technophobe or to adapt to the mindset of a technophile will depend on the attitudes of that individual. Our past experiences determine our thoughts and beliefs, which then influence what we are willing to embrace or not.

For most Boomers technologies as they currently exist were not part of daily life as they progressed through formal learning environments prior to beginning their careers. Becoming familiar with the various technologies now available, and then keeping up with the rapid evolutions of each, is overwhelming at best. Members of generations X, Y and Z, who have grown up integrating new technologies into all areas of their lives, need not consider becoming familiar with emerging technologies as either a gain or a loss; rather it is simply part of how we now live.

Each evolution in technology represents an evolution in the way we think, communicate and interact with each other in the workplace and in society. This level of thinking in turn can be viewed as a form of personal currency in these realms. Boomers who accept technological defeat and choose to remain technophobes risk reducing their workplace currency considerably, regardless of wisdom and experience: a considerable loss. To embrace technology and the gains it brings they would need to overcome many of their negative ideas of how technologies impact our work and personal lives: a foreboding sense of impending dependence on an ever-evolving group of technologies, changing social norms associated with new technologies, the tension between continual availability and a struggle for ‘balance’, frustrating moments of technology-based inattention or interruption throughout the day, and Blackberries in boardrooms.

How technology is used is determined by the ways in which one perceives it as well as the way in which one participates in it. Bridging the digital divide requires both, “physical access to technology and the resources and skills needed to effectively participate as a digital citizen.” (Digital Divide, 2010) Innis believes that, “sudden extensions of communications are reflected in cultural disturbances.” (Innis, 1951) Boomers could be the groundswell of just such a disturbance, where the gains for them would be increased efficiency and productivity, the ability to remain dynamically connected to others and to workplace events as they unfold, powerful new skills and knowledge that fits well with their hard earned wisdom and experience. As technophiles, Boomers could regain their lost workplace currency.

References
Digital Divide. Retrieved October 2, 2010 from Wikipedia Web site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_divide

O’Neill, J. (2008, December 28). More and More Baby Boomers Embrace Technology. Retrieved October 2, 2010 from Finding Dulcinea Web site:http://www.findingdulcinea.com/news/technology/2008/December/More-and-More-Baby-Boomers-Embrace-Technology.html

Postman, N. (1992). Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology. New York: Vintage Books, A Division of Random House, Inc.

Soules, Marshall (1996). Harold Adams Innis: The Bias of Communications & Monopolies of Power. Retrieved October 2, 2010 from Vancouver Island University Web site: http://records.viu.ca/~media113/innis.htm

Innis, Harold. (1951). The Bias of Communication. Toronto: U of Toronto. As quoted in Dobson, T., Lamb, B., & Miller, J. (2009). Prefatory Materials. Retrieved from https://www.vista.ubc.ca/webct/urw/lc5116011.tp0/cobaltMainFrame.dowebct

Posted in Commentary 1, Technology | Tagged , , | 3 Comments

Technology: Burden and Blessing

Posted on October 3, 2010 by Cathy Jung

The following commentary focuses on The Judgement of Thamus, the first chapter in Postman’s book Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology. Postman (1992) uses the legend of Thamus to illustrate and effectively deliver a cautionary warning that “it is a mistake to suppose that any technological innovation has a one-sided effect. Every technology is both a burden and a blessing; not either-or, but this-and-that” (pp. 4-5). From this, we as readers are asked to open our eyes to the burden and blessing of technology in our society.

The burden and blessings inherent in technological innovations can result in social, cultural and ideological changes. To illustrate this point, Postman (1992) cites the example of the clock and its role in bringing about Capitalism (p. 15). This notion of the implications on society and transformations that take place is also discussed by Ong. Ong (2002) points to the transformation that arose out of the technology of writing, whereby “without writing, the literate mind would not and could not think as it does, not only when engaged in writing but normally even when it is composing its thoughts in oral form”(p. 77) .

Key to Postman’s writing is the concept of the impact of technology. Postman’s writing urges users to carefully look rather than blindly leap when it comes to technology.  Postman, by drawing society’s attention to the ‘price tag’ attached to technology encourages one to make more informed decisions and weigh the benefits and costs. Such a need for society to take proactive measures is critical, for failure to do so would leave one in the dark. This predicament is captured by Postman’s assertion regarding technology, whereby “it does not pause to tell us. And we do not pause to ask” (Postman, 1992, p. 9).

Inevitably, new and old technologies collide and the unknown impact that this may have on society and its inhabitants is addressed by Postman. His discussion ponders the social, cultural and ideological implications for school children who must reconcile the world of the printed word which emphasizes logic, sequence and discipline and the world of television which emphasizes imagery, narrative, immediate gratification and emotional response (Postman, 1992, p. 16). Clearly, all the implications cannot be readily seen and may occur over a period of time in the future rather than instantaneously, whereby one may even question the point in time when the change began. Technology plays a strong force through which we conceptualize reality. Postman (1992) drives this point home by illustrating how the tools we use determine one’s view of the world, “to a man with a pencil, everything looks like a list. To a man with a camera, everything looks like an image” (p. 16); thereby instilling a disconcerting feeling amongst his readers who suddenly realize technology can shape our thinking and lives, often without us even being conscious of it.

Postman wrote Technopoly to caution society about the surrender of culture to technology. However, technology and technological innovations are not defined by Postman in this chapter; thus, leaving his readers to rest upon their own understanding of these terms. This in itself represents a stumbling block to his work, as without a common definition of technology, we in essence may be operating under a different conception or premise. For example, Postman discusses writing, but understanding that writing is indeed a technology may elude some readers. To support this stand, Ong (2002) notes that in today’s society we have internalized writing and due to this we find it difficult to consider writing to be a technology; yet writing is a technology (p. 80). Despite the failure to define technology, we can agree that there is an inherent danger in trusting too fully in technology. We need to view technology with reason, looking for that which truly benefits us, rather than embracing technology that lessens us. I would caution against outright fear or wholehearted acceptance as this is not prudent, instead a healthy dose of skepticism is necessary.

As educators, we must determine the role of technology in education. We must escape the trap of simply using technology for technology’s sake. Furthermore, we must question, how technology is altering learning and how education can assess technology. To address this, our education system can look to instill critical thinking and analysis in both our educators and our students. Teaching us to openly question technology will enable us to make conscious decisions. This tenet can be capsulated in Postman’s assertion that “when we admit a new technology to the culture, we must do so with our eyes wide open” (Postman, 1992, p. 7). However, whether our educational system and society will open its eyes wide or keep its eyes closed is yet to be seen.

References

Ong, W. (2002). Orality and literacy. New York: Routledge.

Postman, N. (1992). Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology. New York: Vintage Books. Retrieved on September 11, 2010 from https://www.vista.ubc.ca/webct/RelativeResourceManager/Template/Imported_Resources/etec540demo_det_course_20070517151759/pdfs/postman-thamus.pdf

Posted in Commentary 1 | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Bridging the Knowledge Divide

Posted on October 3, 2010 by ashleyross

Thamus and Harold Innis both spoke of what Innus called ‘knowledge monopolies’ (Postman, 1992, p.9).  They addressed their skepticism for new technologies and the impact that it would have on society, specifically the separation it would create between those who understood the new technology and those who were unable to cultivate the necessary expertise (Postman, 1992).  Another way to look at Thamus and Innis’ skepticism is that it’s not necessarily the new technology that created the divide in power but instead that the divide always existed and the new technology highlighted the distinction between those with the knowledge and those without.  Throughout history, societies stored information that is essential to their survival, whether it was through orality, writing, or some form of new technology (Gaur, 1992).  This commentary will examine the past, present and future of orality and the development of writing.  It will also demonstrate the impact information storage has had on their evolution, and it will show how there is always an elitist group that is a part of any society.

In an oral community, knowledge is not written down or kept outside of the mind.  Instead, knowledge is conceptualized and must be repeated and memorized.  It is for this reason that sound, in particular oral utterances or words, have great power (Ong, 1982).  This is because “sound exists only when it is going out of existence” (Ong, 1982, p.32).  It is impossible to have sound and no sound at the same time, as there is nothing left but silence when sound is disrupted (Ong, 1982).  In this sense, sound is momentary, with the sounds of the beginning of a word being gone as you get to the sounds at the end of the word.

With this in mind, it is easy to see the similarities between the ‘wise old men and women’ who have developed verbal memory skills and mastered how to conserve the knowledge of their society and those individuals who develop the skills to use new technology (Ong, 1982).  In both instances these individuals would be considered the elite members of their society.

Unlike oral communities where knowledge had to be kept inside someone’s mind, writing societies were able to store knowledge somewhere else.  The sounds no longer needed to be associated with a source, they were transformed into paintings on walls, pictographs like hieroglyphs or winter counts, scripts, and eventually alphabets (Gaur, 1992).

Thamus and Innus’ concerns about people becoming competent in new technologies, while others did not, were indeed valid.  The males, who became fluent in Learned Latin for instance, could be considered an elite group over those who were unable to learn.  This was because it was based on academia and that for over a thousand years it was sex-linked; a language written and spoken only by males, learned outside the home in a tribal setting (Ong, 1982).  And those individuals who spoke Learned Latin were also able to write it fluently (Ong, 1982).

In the last few decades, new technology has constantly been developing.  In addition to books, writing has become digitized, and it can be stored on our computers, ereaders or cyberspace.  In the 18th and 19th centuries, libraries were primarily the property of the wealthy elite (Kevin Kelly, pg.7).  For those people who reside in North America and other wealthier countries, libraries have become common and have, for the most part, bridged the divide for access to knowledge in the form of books.  This cultural and social divide has been replaced by a global divide, with wealthy countries having access to current and emerging technologies and impoverished countries having little or no access to standard books (Kelly, 2006; Postman, 1992).

The dream that someday there will be a place that knowledge is kept and accessed by all has already been achieved by some societies (Kelly, 2006).  The Library of Alexandria for example, contained an estimated 30 to 70 percent of the world’s books (Kelly, 2006; Grafton, 2007).  The ideal scenario would be for knowledge, past, present and future, to be kept in a single database library on the Internet where it could be accessed by anyone, anywhere in the world (Kelly, 2006).

This would alleviate Thamus and Innis’ concerns about the balance, or lack thereof, of knowledge of new technology in society.  The Internet has already done much to redress this imbalance by providing Western books for non-Western readers (Grafton, 2007).  It has also helped bridge the divide between the elite who once controlled access to knowledge; and those who had limited or no access, by making a wealth of information readily available in cyberspace.  The power that comes with knowledge has shifted, from the minority to the majority, with access to information being available at the touch of a button.

Reference

Gaur, Albertine. (1992). A history of writing [revised edition]. London.

Grafton, A. (2007, November 5). Future Reading: Digitization and its discontents. The New Yorker. Retrieved from http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/11/05/071105fa_fact_grafton?currentPage=all.

Kelly, K. (2006, May 26). Scan This Book!. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.journalism.wisc.edu/~gdowney/courses/j201/pdf/readings/Kelly%20K%202006%20NYT%20-%20Google%20Print.pdf.

Ong, Walter. (1982.) Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. London: Methuen.

Postman, N. (1992). Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology. New york: Vintage books.

Posted in Commentary 1 | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Orality – Indigenous Knowledge through Oral Narratives

Posted on October 3, 2010 by Barrie Carter


Mythic Messengers – a huge bronze frieze depicting the orality of Haida culture and civilization

I am intrigued by Ong’s Euro-centric perspective on orality. Here, he asserts that the oral mind is aggregative, traditional, and “unable to detach itself from its context” (Bolter, 2001, p. 191). Ong further asserts that, “syllogistic reasoning…[is] foreign to a culture without writing (ibid). And, finally, Ong maintains that, “an oral culture simply does not deal in such terms as geometrical figures, abstract categorization, formally logical reasoning processes, definition, or even comprehensive descriptions, or articulated self-analysis” (ibid). In turn, I am compelled to offer a different perspective, for Ong’s claim seems to undermine the complexity and the intricacy of the intersection between orality and oral groups, peoples, and cultures. Specifically, I would like to introduce Indigenous knowledge through oral traditions like oral narratives.

For over thousands of years, Indigenous knowledge has accumulated because Indigenous Peoples have a close and interconnected relationship with their surroundings, observe their environment carefully, and learn through experience. Here, the teachings of Indigenous Peoples come from observing and learning from the water, the moon, the plants, the animals, the stars, the wind, and the spirit world. In turn, the world of Indigenous knowledge includes language, governance, philosophy, education, health, medicine, and the environment (McGregor, 2004). Thus, Indigenous knowledge is founded in “… the immediate world of personal and tribal experiences… and … spiritual world evidenced through dreams, visions, and signs” (Battiste, 1986, p. 2). Thus, by way of oral traditions and histories, this accumulated knowledge has been passed on to subsequent generations, using oral narratives like sacred creation stories, songs, historical events, cultural traditions, environmental knowledge, educational lessons, and personal life experiences (ibid).

However, as per the colonial impacts on Indigenous oral narratives, the forces of colonization affected the writing and the orality of the Indigenous Peoples of Canada. Here, the European colonizers rejected the “pictographs, petroglyphs, notched sticks and wampums [that] were the primary Native texts of Algonkian ideographic literacy” (Battiste, 1986, p. 2). The symbolic literacy of Algonkian was suppressed, and then replaced by the European written system (ibid). Furthermore, by way of the Indian Act, the forced assimilation affected the oral traditions of the Indigenous Peoples. The assimilation policies and regulations took over the social, the political, and the economic autonomy of Aboriginal Peoples. For example, the banning of speaking Native languages in residential schools has created a gap in transferring traditional knowledge to subsequent generations. In addition, various epidemics and diseases reduced the number of elders who were the custodians of the Indigenous oral tradition (Gill, 2009).

For Indigenous Peoples, oral narratives are relevant in today’s society because oral narratives connect the past to the present. Here, the orator constantly evaluates and balances “… old customs with new ideas” (Cruikshank, 1990, p. 21). As such, to address these challenges and to avoid resistance by the young generation, teaching oral narratives and stories necessitate qualification, guidance, and creativity of the elders who need to bridge the past to the present. Indeed, one of the significant elements of the Indigenous narratives is “… understanding of a worldview embedded in Aboriginal oral traditions” (Archibald, 2008, p. 13). A lack of cultural understanding of a particular Indigenous worldview limits the process of uncovering the layers that are embedded within the Indigenous stories, and Indigenous oral narratives may have many variations, metaphors, and symbols with implicit meanings and layers (Cruikshank, 1991).

Furthermore, animals and supernatural characters are present in most Indigenous traditional stories. In response to the reason for the presence of animal characters in the stories, Ellen White explains that, “If I was to mention a name and point at one of you I might be injuring you [and] the whole universe” (Archibald, 2008, p. 137). It is necessary to understand the Indigenous belief systems, worldviews, and cosmology before approaching indigenous oral narratives. In some oral narratives, the animals and the supernatural characters are neither fictitious nor fake. Instead, they are rooted in the Indigenous worldviews, cosmology, and belief systems (ibid).

Moreover, it is important to note the inherent challenges of translating oral tradition and oral narratives into the English language. This is due to the “… cultural boundaries” between Indigenous Peoples and non-indigenous people (Cruikshank, 1991, p. 6). Oral traditions include “a belief system” that is meant to be shared orally. When the Indigenous oral tradition is presented in written form, it hinders true understanding because written form fails to capture the cultural contexts in a meaningful way. Additionally, many non-indigenous writers and translators appropriate, distort, and exploit Indigenous oral narratives by, at least, romanticizing indigenousness by emphasizing ‘nobility’. In this context, language can become an instrument for perpetuating colonial stereotypes, tone, and attitudes (Archibald, 2008).

To survive as a people, Indigenous Peoples have accumulated valuable knowledge over thousands of years. This wealth of knowledge has been passed on to subsequent generations. To Indigenous Peoples, oral language is the most important vehicle of transferring Indigenous knowledge. More specifically, Kwiaahwah Jones of the Haida Gwai’i Nation, writes about the importance of oral language in that the “… Haida language is a link to our past, our present and our future [and] gives us a deep knowledge of the land and sea, and a way of thinking that is uniquely Haida” (Jones, 2009, p. 1). That is, Haida’s sophisticated ecological knowledge is reflected in its oral language. Haida words are very specific to its meaning. Through oral narratives, the elders have carried the responsibility of transferring the oral traditional knowledge to subsequent generations. Oral language is an essential instrument that allows the elders to communicate their knowledge to others, particularly children (Ramsay, 2005, p. 3).

Although Ong writes that oral narratives are found in all cultures and are more functional in primary oral cultures, he limits his perspective when he maintains that knowledge via oral narratives cannot be managed in elaborate scientific ways, that oral cultures cannot generate scientific categories (Ong, 1982, p. 137). However, the demarcation line between Indigenous knowledge and Western knowledge has resulted in differentiating between Indigenous and Western knowledge. That is, the Euro-centric perspective highlights the differences by labeling Indigenous knowledge as non-scientific, ‘primitive’, concrete, non-systematic, and localized (Agrawal, 2004, p. 3). Here, Agrawal states that there is “ intolerance of scientists towards insights and inquiry outside established, institutionalized science” (ibid). Agrawal believes that both Indigenous and Western knowledge should be considered as “multiple domains of knowledge, with differing logics and epistemologies” (ibid, p. 5). In addition, Barnhardt and Kawagley (2005) write that Indigenous Peoples “have studied and know a great deal about the flora and fauna, and they have their own classification systems and visions of meteorology, physics, chemistry, earth science, astronomy, botany, pharmacology, psychology” (p. 7). Certainly, it seems that categorizing and comparing Western and Indigenous knowledge have served only non-indigenous interest.

Overall, without oral traditions like oral narratives, Indigenous knowledge will be recorded only in text for viewing. Ong’s Euro-centric perspective does not consider this, for he states that the written word can exist, whereas oral narratives cannot exist without an orator (Ong, 1982, p. 11). However, in response to this, Indigenous communities have taken an active role in re-claiming their voices and re-telling their oral tradition. For instance, curriculum developers, Indigenous elders, and educators are working together in creating educational programs that value orality. Here, there is a need for creating a space for Indigenous communities in establishing curriculum that is based on their respective Indigenous traditions around oral narratives (Archibald, 2008, p. 83).

References

Agrawal, A. (2004). Indigenous and scientific knowledge: some critical comments. IK Monitor, 3(3). Retrieved October 1, 2010, from http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:clNYr-MDso0J:www-personal.umich.edu/~arunagra/papers/IK+Monitor+3(3)+Agrawal.pdf+Indigenous+and+scientific+knowledge:+some+critical+comments&hl=en&gl=ca

Archibald, J. (2008). Indigenous storywork: Educating the heart, mind, body, and spirit. UBCPress. Vancouver.

Barnhardt, R. & Kawagley, A.O. (2005, March). Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Alaska Native Ways of Knowing. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 36(1), 8-23. Retrieved October 1, 2010, from http://www.ankn.uaf.edu/curriculum/Articles/BarnhardtKawagley/Indigenous_Knowledge.html

Battiste, M. (1986). Micmac literacy and cognitive assimilation. In J. Barman, Y. Hebert, & D. McCaskill (Eds.), Indian education in Canada: The legacy (Vol. 1, pp. 23-44). Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.

Bolter, Jay David. (2001). Writing space: Computers, hypertext, and the remediation of print [2nd edition]. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

Cruikshank, J. (1991). Oral and written interpretations of the past. In Dan dha ts
edenintth e = Reading voices: Oral and written interpretations of the Yukon’s
past (pp. 11-21) Vancouver, BC: Douglas and McIntyre.

Cruikshank, J. (1990). My stories are my wealth: Angela Sidney. In life lived like story: Life stories of three Yukon elders. (pp. 21, 23-52). Omaha: University of Nebraska Press.

Curator & Collector: A Blog about the Art, Museums, and Numismatics of the Northwest Coast. Retrieved October 1, 2010, from http://curatorandcollector.com/?p=341

Gill, I. (2009). Guujaaw and the reawakening of the Haida Nation: All that we say is ours. Douglas & McIntyre. Vancouver.

Jones, K. How do we say cell phone in Haida? (2009, April) Haida Lass. A Special Language Edition. Retrieved October 1, 2010, from http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:oOeoAspCd2IJ:www.haidanation.ca/Pages/Haida_Laas/PDF/Newsletters/Language_09.pdf+Haida+Laas.+A+Special+Language+Edition&hl=en&gl=ca

McGregor, D. (2004). “Coming full circle: Indigenous Knowledge, environment, and our future” American Indian Quarterly. 28 (3&4).

Ong, Walter. (1982.) Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. London: Methuen.

Ramsay, H. (2005, Winter). Preserving the Haida Language. Canadian Teacher Magazine. Retrieved October 1, 2010, from http://www.canadianteachermagazine.com/ctm_first_nations_education/winter05_preserving_haida_language.shtml

Posted in Commentary 1 | Tagged , , | 2 Comments

The Evolution of Loss – Commentary on O’Donnell

Posted on October 3, 2010 by Annette Smith
Male Lion at the Zoo

Why the lion?

In “The Virtual Library: An Idea Whose Time Has Passed” James O’Donnell both charts the surprisingly long history of the concept of the virtual library, and the unavoidable demise of the library as we conceive of it today (O’Donnell, 1994). But human history, and even pre-history, has always been characterized by loss. This loss is a necessary part of our progress. Even in the brain, the mysterious seat of the mind, is subject to loss in the course of normal development. The written word on paper, which O’Donnell sees as inevitably being superseded by digital text, will perhaps be lost to a pruning of human knowledge, as has happened continuously since we first walked upright.

The main features of a virtual library, as defined by O’Donnell are “a vast, ideally universal collection of information and instantaneous access to that information” (1994, p. 1). He describes how in the last decades the virtual library was imagined as a virtual reality experience with helmets, goggles and gloves. But according to O’Donnell the idea of a truly comprehensive collection of knowledge, with easy access, has existed for centuries.

He begins his historical review of the idea of a virtual library with Vanevar Bush, who in 1945 wrote about a device called the “Memex” (1994, p. 1), but goes much further. If the defining features of a virtual library are “the combination of total inclusiveness and near-instantaneous access” (1994, p. 2), then, he asserts, the history of the idea goes back to the beginning of the history of the book. The earliest example he uses dates from the 2nd Century BC, but he also mentions the legendary library at Alexandria as proof that even before the codex there was a desire to have an exhaustive collection of knowledge. The fantasy of the virtual library is that it “promises a future that will be just like the past only better and faster” (1994. p. 8). As he says:

“The dream today is weighed down with silicon chips, keyboards, screens, headsets, and other cumbersome equipment — but someday a dream of say telepathic access will make today’s imaginings suddenly as outmoded as a daisy-wheel printer.” (O’Donnell, 1994, p.2)

Although we have seemingly dreamed of the virtual library for centuries, according to O’Donnell it is not self-evident that the words of long-dead humans really should live on forever. He indicates that we may soon lose the concept of the single author, and the “hallucination” that reality can be reduced to a single, universally accepted model (1994, p. 7). O’Donnell is confident that the idea that the sum total of all our human knowledge can be stored in a library will also disappear. Libraries as we currently know them will fade away, as the monasteries of the Middle Ages did when they ceased to be useful, although vestiges will survive. Partly this is because the enormity of human knowledge out-gallops our ability to catalog and itemize it. In the notes to the paper O’Donnell remarks that the volume at which we produce information, and increase its output, “defies the power of the imagination to conceive it” (1994, notes [11]). For librarians, O’Donnell describes the roles they might play in the future as active participants in keeping information out, using discerning judgment to stave off information overload.

Stained neuron

Stained Neuron

Loss of information, by filtering out that which is not of use, has been with us longer than text. Even in the development of the brain there is a pruning of the synaptic connections. At ages 2 or 3 we have between 50% and 100% more connections between neurons than we will in adulthood. The connections are selectively deleted as we approach puberty (Chechik et al., 1998). In terms of our technology, for example, for the most part we have lost the knowledge of how to make sophisticated stone tools. This is now known only to a select few archaeologists. Ong (1982) writes that in oral cultures, matters from the past which have lost their relevance to the present are dropped from the oral record. At the advent of written language the Greeks lost some of the oral poetry that had been central to their culture (Birkerts, 1994). In the article discussed here O’Donnell describes that in the transition from scrolls to codex, most of that which was not copied to the new format was lost. And yet, we as a species have survived and continue to function.

O’Donnell accepts this loss, but feels that predictions about what the future of information will look like are best left to “wild-eyed visionary cyberpunk sci-fi” writers (1994, p.9). I would agree, but would add that this loss of information is essential to our survival.  Marshall McLuhan said “One of the effects of living with electric information is that we live habitually in a state of information overload. There’s always more than you can cope with” (McLuhan, 1967). If our ancestors, as hunters on the plains, had taken in and reviewed all the sensory information their organs perceived, they would have been so assaulted by data that there is a good chance that they would not see an approaching lion until too late. Attention and orientation are modulated by the relevance or salience of an event or cue. This is called selective attention (Bradley, 2009). So perhaps we should not lament the loss of libraries, ancient scrolls, and the knowledge of how to knap a flint arrowhead. We should, as O’Donnell suggests, become Jedi knights of information, sifting through the volume to find that which will keep us safe from the lions on the coming horizon.

Lions

Lions in the savannah

References

Birkerts, S. (1994). The Gutenberg Elegies: The Fate of Reading in an Electronic Age. Winchester, MA: Faber and Faber.

Bradley, M., M. (2009). Natural selective attention: Orienting and emotion. Psychophysiology, 46 (2009), 1–11. Retrieved October 1, 2010 from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2008.00702.x/pdf

Chechick, G., Meilijson, I., & Ruppin, E. (1998). Synaptic Pruning in Development: A Computational Account. Neural Computation, 10(7). 1759-1777. Retrieved October 1, 2010 from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/089976698300017124

McLuhan, M. (1967) The Best of Ideas, CBC Radio. Retrieved October 2, 2010 from http://faculty.uml.edu/sgallagher/marshall_mcluhan.htm

Posted in Commentary 1 | Leave a comment

I read a book today. It has these things called “pages”.

Posted on October 3, 2010 by Camille Maydonik

YouTube Preview Image

Kevin Kelly’s (2006) article “Scan this Book!” presents an idealistic view of what could someday be known as a Universal Library, where “unlike the libraries of the old, which were restricted to the elite, this library would be truly democratic, offering every book to every person” (p.1).  The work around scanning and digitizing all books, documents, pieces of art and generally all knowledge in all languages has started.  Page by page, this mass documentation is happening all over the world, with a major project to digitally scan the books of five major research libraries to make their content searchable spearheaded by Google.

Kelly (2006) presents an optimistic view of this global undertaking and demonstrates the benefits of a universal library.  Many universities are increasing their collection of books through the procurement of digital copies, which are then put into the hands of their students.  This makes me think of my experience in the MET program as all learning in this program is done online. I have accessed the UBC library from my computer countless times over the past two years.  There is no doubt that I have had numerous databases of academic journals at my fingertips, once I’ve logged in.  What will happen when I have completed this program and am not a student at UBC?  In effect, I will lose access to a major resource that could help me in my professional life.  Will this be the case with the universal library?  Even with Google Books, only portions of the books are available at the publisher’s discretion.

The movement towards virtual libraries is not unique to universities.  Kelly (2006) states, “the main advantage of the coming digital library is portability” (p.4).  We are experiencing this today, in fact, I read Kelly’s (2006) article on my iPad.  Our students are more connected than ever and are able to access are read almost anything on the devices they carry in their pockets.  I recently participated in a symposium on digital citizenship where during a panel discussion; a middle school principal stated that the physical space that the library was taking up in his school was valuable “real-estate”.  He argued that there are fewer and fewer “gatekeepers” of digital information, and where there still are, they are “barbarians”.  His view was for a “learning commons” approach in his school, where information would be accessible to his students no matter where they are physically in the school.  Listening to this speaker, I couldn’t help but wonder about the social implications of implementing a learning commons approach.  Is there not something to be said about the physical act of going to the library to check out books?

On the other hand, the affordances of a universal library with tagging and linking will interconnect many, many books, as we have seen with the Internet and social bookmarking sites, such as delicious.com.  “Once a book has been integrated into the new expanded library by means of this linking, its text will no longer be separate from the text in other books” (Kelly, 2006, p. 4).   This cross-linking makes me think of the “Choose your own Adventure” books when I was a young reader.  You can literally get lost in the multitude of data, although there is benefit in understanding the relationships and connections between books and other pieces of information, such as references.

We live in a culture of remix where the lines concerning intellectual property and copyright are blurred.  Murphie & Potts, in their 2003 book “Culture & Technology” define Intellectual Property as “the ownership of particular items of knowledge, ideas or cultural production.  This includes songs, texts, films, recordings, software, even chemical compounds or blocks of genetic material” (p. 68). Intellectual property rights are part of a larger web of copyright, reproduction, deconstruction, and freedom of expression.  Furthermore, in the digital age, digital property comes into the mix in the form of remix and mashups.  How would a universal library address these issues?  Publishers have abandoned many books as it is uncertain who exactly owns the work.

Lawrence Lessig, the creator and founder of creative commons, a nonprofit corporation dedicated to making it easier for people to share and build upon the work of others, consistent with the rules of copyright, so others can share, remix, use commercially, or any combination thereof has argued that copyright has always been at war with technology.  According to Lessig, the creativity of millions of people has been displaced by our culture moving from a read-write culture to a read-only existence because of copyright.  Now that we are in the 21st century, can we say that we are still only in a read-only existence due to copyright?  Murphie & Potts (2003) state that this situation has engendered two types of responses: “one of near panic, as copyright holders have scrambled to protect their rights with recourse to the law; another of celebration, by those welcoming a digital public domain free of the excessive restrictions of copyright” (p. 69).  Google’s approach is to “scan orphan books first and only afterward honor any legitimate requests to remove the scan” (Kelly, 2006, p. 10).  Whether or not this is the correct approach, the digitization of a universal library must start somewhere.

In conclusion, Kelly’s (2006) article has left me excited about the possibilities of a digital library, but has also left me cautiously optimistic.  Is an endeavour this enormous realistic?  Most new works of writing will have a digital counterpart.  With the rate of new books being produced, I wonder if we will ever be able to digitize knowledge of the past.

References

Kelly, K. (2006, May 14).  Scan this book!  New York Times, pp. 1 – 14.  Retrieved from: http://www.journalism.wisc.edu/~gdowney/courses/j201/pdf/readings/Kelly K 2006 NYT – Google Print.pdf

Murphie, A., & Potts, J. (2003). Culture & Technology. New York, NY:    Palgrave Macmillan.

Posted in Commentary 1 | Leave a comment

Entering the Digital Era

Posted on October 3, 2010 by Kirklan Lum

Are we entering an era where our entire culture can now be perfectly preserved in a modern day “Library of Alexandria?” With the advent of the computer we can now make exact replicas of digital works, where there is no loss of quality each time it is copied. We can store massive amounts of data in extremely small spaces, and we have the ability to very quickly search that data for the information we want. This superhuman ability to store, find and then view that data without having to print it is greatly reducing costs. Computers and the internet also allow us to easily send digital data virtually anywhere in the world, again at a very low cost. Indeed the future appears bright for the protection of our culture, where future historians will have a vast quantity of video, audio, and written documents to learn of us from, rather than a few fossilized bits of organic matter from which to construct the past.

That is of course, assuming that there are no issues to challenge this utopian idea. Unfortunately, upon closer examination we may have cause for concern. The concept of a virtual library, a library that contains all the works completed by humankind, has been around for fifteen hundred years (O’Donnell, 1994). The aforementioned Library of Alexandria was a noble effort in this cause, and “when Google announced in December 2004 that it would digitally scan the books of five major research libraries to make their contents searchable, the promise of a universal library was resurrected” (Kelly, 2006). However, even aside from the laborious and quite possibly impossible task of finding and scanning every book ever written, there are still many other road blocks to creating a centralized repository of all human knowledge.

Kelly (2006) suggests that Google’s efforts to organize all efforts will be aided by the fact that every author wants a greater readership, and that “every author fears obscurity.” I disagree. Not every author wants to have his material available to the general public. There are many artists who thrive on having their work marginalized in the public eye. Consider the modern magician who has two revenue streams. He performs magic shows for the general public, but he also writes books on how to perform magic for other magicians to learn from. In book form, the magician has control over who will read his book, as perhaps he only sells them to other magicians at magic conventions. He can be confident that the magicians who buy his book would still buy tickets to his show, in order to see with their own eyes how the trick is presented, even if they know the method. On the other hand, if his book was available to everyone, and read by a person just looking to “know how the trick is done,” that person is much less likely to purchase a ticket to see a trick that they already know the method to.

There is also the question of whether a collection of digital information will change the very culture that we seek to protect. The very nature of a successful digital repository – easily accessible by anyone, easily edited, and highly interconnected – is changing how we think of the modern day author. This is supported by O’Donnell, (1994) who states,

“The notion that authoritative discourse comes with a single monologic voice surely depends on the creation of the written artefact. Both oral discourse and the networked conversations that already surround us suggest that in dialogue a fuller representation of the world may be found, precisely because conflicting voices deserve to be heard.”

According to Brand (1999), there is another phenomenon that threatens the security of our culture. Obsolescence. This I agree with. How many people have information currently sitting on 3 ½” or 5 ¼” floppy disks, or zip disks, with no way of retrieving the information from them (O’Donnell, 1998)? Even if they could find a computer with the hardware to access those storage devices, would they still have the software required to display the data properly? Just last year the school that I teach at finally stopped using remark, and any data that was saved on it is no longer accessible. Codex books have stood the test of time in part because they display themselves, and if you can read the language you don’t need anything else to obtain the information from the book. On the other hand, a CD is useless if you do not have a CD player. Even if you have a CD player you need the right program, and the right version of the program to read it. You might also need plug-ins, or other applications depending on what the CD contains. Of course, if you have no idea what’s on the CD, you won’t know what software you’ll need just by looking at it. On top of that, this all assumes that there is no kind of password or other encryption that was intended to prevent the files from being viewed in the first place. Even NASA is not immune to the danger that obsolescence poses to data preservation. NASA has “reels and reels of tape bearing computer data from the 1960s [that] are now, at best, a series of 1s and 0s, while the hardware and software that created them have long since been rendered obsolete and destroyed” (O’Donnell, 1998).

Although computers offer us enormous potential for storing vast quantities of data, it is this very ability that can lead to the loss of our culture. According to Brand (1999), the lift span of a CD is 10 years, and the half life of data is 5 years. He then goes on to state that nearly all of our art, science, news, and other records are being created and stored on media that we know can’t outlast even our own lifetimes. If we as a society wish to digitally conserve our culture, we must begin organizing our information with long term preservation in mind. If we do not, then future historians may yearn for a few fossilized bits of organic matter in order to construct a picture of who we were.

References

Brand, Stewart. (1999). Escaping The Digital Dark Age. Library Journal, Vol. 124 Issue 2, p 46.
Retrieved September 25, 2010, from http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=1&hid=17&sid=3af6a54e-c65c-4c2a-98fc-7302bca0c79840sessionmgr13&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=tfh&AN=1474780

Kelly, Kevin. (2006, May 14). Scan This Book! The New York Times. Retrieved
September 25, 2010, from http://www.journalism.wisc.edu/~gdowney/courses/j201/pdf/readings/Kelly%20K%202006%20NYT%20-%20Google%20Print.pdf

O’Donnell, James J. (1998). The Instability Of The Text. In Avatars of the Word. From Papyrus to Cyberspace. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Up, p 44-49. Retrieved September 25, 2010, from http://www.public.asu.edu/~dgilfill/speakers/odonnell1.html

O’Donnell, James J. (1994). The Virtual Library; An Idea Whose Time Has Passed. Retrieved
September 25, 2010, from http://web.archive.org/web/20070204034556/http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/jod/virtual.html

Posted in Commentary 1 | Leave a comment

Commentary #1 – Technopoly

Posted on October 3, 2010 by doug larsen

 

The Surrender of Culture to Technology

In light of Neil Postman’s (1992) title “Technopoly” I decided to place my commentary within the context of two competing cultures to emphasize the notion of “surrendering of culture to technology”. Often, when the notion of technology is discussed amongst educators the dialogue focuses on its role within the classroom, the opportunity cost of technology compared to books excreta, and/or how much professional development training is required to effectively use the latest technology.  Postman’s (1992) argument that technology has a cost as well as a benefit (pg.5) transcends the typical pros and cons debate about technology to one that is central to our values and worldview – our culture.   Postman (1992) advances the view of technology to a different level than mere opportunity costs, or its suitability, but to the notion of what type of educational system do we want.  This raises the question of how technology has influenced our lens that shapes our education system and ordering of our world? 

Postman’s  argument will be discussed in the context to two worldviews – Western and Aboriginal perspectives.    Western and Aboriginal societies have two fundamentally different world views.  This has created an alienation and lack of relevance for Aboriginal learners within the Western educational system (Kawagley,A & Barnardt, R., 1998).  In essence, this lack of relevance may pertain to Thamus’s notion of “conceited wisdom” and “real wisdom” (Postman, 1992, pg.16).  George Hein (1991) argues that “the great triumph of Western intellectual history from Enlightenment to 20th century rested on its ability to organize the knowledge of the world in rational way independent of the learner, determined by some structure of the subject” (pg2).  Western thought compartmentalizes information, studying disciplines in isolation of each other allowing for in-depth examination.  In contrast, the First Nation world view has an underlying philosophy of interconnectedness.  One seeks to understand the relationships among the various elements in the context of one’s surroundings.  According to Kawagley and Barnhardt(1998) “education needs to be reconnected to a sense of place” ( pg 1).  The following abbreviated story highlights how conceited wisdom and real wisdom results in a disconnect when they interact within the same environmental context.    

 A group of scientist visited Minto Flats in Alaska.  There was a concern regarding the diminishing number of returning pike fish and hydrology issues.  The scientist approached the First Nation community elders to inform them of their activities, and about the importance of the data they were gathering. The group of scientist comprised of a beaver specialist, two fish biologist, a moose specialist, and a hydrology specialist.  Each specialist spoke to what their role was in this process to ascertain data about increased sediment in the rivers due to mining, and reduced pike migration.  However, one of the elders asked about them what they were going to do about the burn policy?  This created confusion, thus resulting in the scientists stating they had nothing to do with it, nor was there anyone present that could speak to it so they proceeded to inform the elders of how the sediment was affecting the pike migration and the need to track the winter migration of the pike (Kawagley, et. al., 1998).

In response to the scientists, a ninety year old former traditional chief, Peter John, responded by providing a detailed overview of the ecological system of the Minto Flats.  He informed the scientists that the burn policy, which allowed fires to burn unless they were endangering man- made structures, was the cause of the problem for low pike migration rates.  Even though the Minto people did not have building on the flats, it did not mean they weren’t using the area.  When fires are permitted to burn, it causes the beavers to move up streams to the sloughs resulting in the sentiment filling up in the sloughs and destroying the pike’s spawning beds.  He also highlighted that the technology used to track the fish ruined them for consumption, and if they wanted to know where the pike spend the winter they should ask.  The scientist data only dated back thirty years, where the Minto people had 10 generations of information passed on as a means to their survival.   Peter John stated, if you want to know where the pike spend the winter ask me and I’ll tell you.  “While the scientist with their specialized knowledge and elaborate tools were well intentioned, the gulf between their compartmentalized, limited time-frame view of the world and the holistic, multi-generational perspective of Peter John appeared insurmountable (Kawagley & Barnhardt, 1998, pg7).  This story supports Postman’s (1992) argument that “one significant change generates total change” (pg.18), but a compartmentalized approach does not identify the interconnectedness of the change, thus drawing inappropriate conclusions.  The group’s challenge was how to establish a connection between these two fundamentally different systems to the benefit of all concerned.

As educators, the above story has immediate relevance to us because we make decisions about the adoption and implementation of technologies that generate significant changes, but are we examining the interconnectedness of the educational ecological system? As noted by Postman (1992), Thamus suggests that “those that have control over a particular technology accumulate power, and this inevitably works as a conspiracy against those without the technology” (pg.9).  Initially, this statement appears to be alarmist and in isolation of today’s technologically advanced society.  However, this perspective is apparent within a western dominated educational system that evidently marginalizes many First Nation learners.  In British Columbia 2002/03 – 2007/08 cohort 48% of Aboriginal students completed grade 12 within six years.  By contrast, 80% of “all students category” completed high school within six years (Ministry of Education, 2007/08). The statistics get more dramatic when one examines high school and post secondary completion.  Approximately 35% of Aboriginal students make an immediate transition to post secondary, compared to non-First Nation at 65% (Ministry of Education, Aboriginal Report 2003/04 – 2007/08).  Indigenous participation in Western educational systems has been with limited interest and engagement resulting minimal outcomes (Kawagley, et.al., 1998). 

There is a demonstrated validity of Innis’s argument that “the benefits and deficits of a new technology are not distributed equally (Postman, 1992, pg9).  Technology of transportation brought two fundamentally different cultures together resulting in the “dominance of the Western world-view.  Postman (1992) suggest that if there is a conspiracy it is one a culture conspiring against itself (pg 12) which is evident in schools, for example between visual technologies such as television and print technologies, competing for the mind of students.  This perspective comes from the dominance of his world-view, thus failing to state that there is not one homogenous culture within the influence of western technologies, though it may primarily emerge from one culture.  “Surrounding every technology are institutions whose organization …reflects the world-view promoted by the technology (Postman, 1992, pg.18). Consequently, when “new technologies compete …for dominance of their world-view” (Postman, 1992, pg.16) it has further advanced the dominant culture at the expense of First Nation cultures. 

Hence, the entire education system has an inherent bias that marginalizes a segment of our population that do not have the power to change the imbalance.  The power for potential change lies with educators, but they need to understand how the western educational system can be changed to be inclusive of alternative methods of learning.  The public education system has adopted a narrow cognitive approach to education.  Educating is an enculturation process where one learns the values of life.  I believe the education goals of Aboriginal peoples and communities are similar to other peoples.  Holistic education is one of the core ingredients to the establishment of healthy First Nation communities, as well as non-First Nation communities.  “Education is the bootstrap which First Nations communities must use to improve their social and economic conditions. Like all others in Canada, Aboriginal children need to acquire an acceptable education to have a chance of succeeding in the modern economy” (Medelson, 2008, pg2). How can we use educational technologies to create an inclusive educational system? 

References

Hein, George (1991) Constructivist Learning Theory, The Museum and the Needs of People” CECA Conference, www.exploratorium.edu/ifi/resources/constructivistlearning.html, pg2

 Kawagley, A., & Barnhardt, R., (1998). Education Indigenous to Place: Western Science Meets Native Reality. Retrieved from ERIC database.

Mendelson, M. Improving Education on Reserves: A First Nations Education Authority, Retrieved September 28, 2009, from http://www.caledoninst.org/Publications/PDF/684ENG.pdf  Published by: Caledon Institute of Social Policy.

British Columbia Ministry of Education, Summary of Key Information 2007/08,Retreived from http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/keyinfo/archive/ski08.pdf

British Columbia Ministry of Education. Aboriginal Report 2003/4-2007/8: How Are We Doing?  Retrieved from http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/abed/performance.htm

Postman, N. (1992). Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology. New York: Vintage Books

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Posted on October 3, 2010 by Soraya

Nablus, Palestine

Hello 🙂
I chose this image because it represents the contradiction between the openness and interconnectedness of the world brought about by technology but also the limiting factors for those that are marginalized and whose voice is never heard. It may be seen in an image captured through the eyes of the photographer- or interpreted and written about in text. The image also represents the instability of text and the fading memories of culture due to digitization of pressing issues often presented from a bias perspective. When I look at this image I see a symbol of protection of culture and an open space with nowhere to hide the rocks but behind the young man’s back.
This strong imagery sends many messages. Contrary to technology, that applies an emphasis on the rational, I see ambiguity in the image. How can imagery and other technology mediums change the thinking of humankind? How will this effect the outcomes of pressing world conflicts and issues? and also how will this effect the conflict of ignorance between the East and West?
I am a Grade 12 English teacher teaching in a remote desert region of the Emirate of Abu Dhabi at a girls Secondary School. I work for the Abu Dhabi Education Council as part of an initiative by the Abu Dhabi government to educate the young girls in the region. My students have never been exposed to Western teachers and therefore, I see this as an opportunity to understand another culture and find commonalities, bringing together people to reach a shared understanding about the simplicities of life. I am very interested in this class as I notice here the impact of technology is somewhat changing the spaces of reading and writing but in this very oral culture. I am interested to know more about past tradition and how this will be preserved through initiatives by the Emiratee government but also by the students themselves. The role of technology and learning have changed drastically in the last two years here in the Middle East. The style of teaching has also changed and I hope that this class will help me to learn more about technology and how is relates to the the spaces that we are all a part of – whether it is intentional or not. We must be keep up with technology to allow ourselves to maintain global connection but at what point should we stop focussing on rationality and demonstrate human interconnectedness and understanding? I am looking forward to reading, sharing, discussing and learning together.

Posted in Introductions | Leave a comment

Universal Library

Posted on October 2, 2010 by rsuzuki

Commentary 1:

In the article, Scan This Book!, Kevin Kelly discusses the possibility of establishing a universal library. Kelly argues that the benefits of the universal library with digitalized materials surpass the traditional library with printed materials. The universal library would enable people to access all available digitalized materials, such as books, articles, images, and films from anywhere in the world. According to Kelly, there are two major advantages of the digitalized universal library. First advantage is portability. Not only does it make it easier for people to read digitalized books, but also it enables libraries to increase their collection at cheaper cost. Secondly, people will benefit from the interconnectivity of digitalized materials that are cross-linked with other materials.

Today, publishers control the fate of printed books. Publishers who have heavily relied on cheap mass produced copies to make profits for years do not print unprofitable books. According to Kelly, “It has created a vast collection of works that have been abandoned by publishers, a continent of books left permanently in the dark” (Kelly, 2006, p. 8). About 75 percent of all books in the world’s libraries have been “orphaned.”

Kelly points out key issues that are hindering the digitalization of printed materials. Corporations and libraries around the world are now scanning about a million books per year (Kelly, 2006, p. 2). However, it is not enough to establish a universal library. One stumbling block is the copyright law. Today, more intellectual property is owned by corporations rather than by individuals (Kelly, 2006). These corporations influence the nature of copyright law for their own benefit. According to existing copyrights, “nothing – no published creative works of any type – will fall out of protection and return to the public domain until 2019. Almost everything created today will not return to the commons until the next century” (Kelly, 2006, p. 8). This reality seems to thwart any attempt at creating a digitalized universal library. Another problem is the copyrighting is that large publishers are not certain about what they actually own. A list of copyrighted works does not exist anywhere. Tracking and identifying the copyright owner for each book seems impossible.

Google hopes to rescue these orphaned books by digitalizing them. They will display the entire digitalized book for out-of-copyright books, while they will only show excerpts of digitalized versions of in-print books. Google has the ability to save millions of abandoned books. However, many publishers and authors stand against Google. The two main reasons for their objection are potential lost revenue and violation of copyright. Publishers and authors question the fact that scanned materials exist on Google’s server. Although publishers do receive shared revenues from ads posted on Google, they also want revenues from the books they abandoned. Many publishers are also questioning the Google’s approach of scanning the materials first and then dealing with the copyright issue. Kelly quotes Jane Friedman the C.E.O. of HarperCollins, “I don’t expect this suit to be resolved in my lifetime” (Kelly, 2006, p. 13). This indicates a long battle for this legal clash.

Kelly is an advocate of the universal library with access to all knowledge of the past and present. He goes on to explain the benefits that a universal library could offer. However, his vision of the library where “the entire works of humankind, from the beginning of recorded history, in all languages, available to all people, all the time” (Kelly, 2006, 2) seems too unrealistic. He does recognize and discuss the setbacks of establishing a universal library, but he does not demonstrate how those obstacles can be resolved. For example, when he points out the copyright problem, Kelly does not provide us with clear solutions to resolve this conflict. It is not enough to just propose an idealistic universal library without also suggesting methods to overcome the existing hindrances. Kelly does suggest a new business model, in which “authors and artists can make their livings selling aspects of their works other than inexpensive copies of them” (Kelly, 2006, p. 12). However, I find this business model is unrealistic. How large publishers could be persuaded is in question. How would they make money in this new business model?

Establishing a universal library with cross-linked digitalized materials is a great dream for our and future generations, however, everybody has to agree with the terms involved in the set-up of the library in order for it to be realized. For example, not only some, but all of the publishers’ materials would have to be digitalized and cross-referenced online. With large publishers owning or claiming copyright to certain materials, it seems that they are not willing to make all of their resources free.

Finally, there is a great danger concerning control and ownership of the digitalized materials. Kelly lists some major corporations and institutions digitalizing printed materials, such as Amazon, Google, Stanford Libraries, and Superstar. Who would control the digitalized materials if there were to be a digitalized universal library? According to Kelly, more and more materials are digitalized in China and India because it is inexpensive. Does that mean they could control more digitalized materials? Kelly says, “If you can truly incorporate all texts on a particular subject then you can have a clearer sense of what we as a civilization, a species, do know and don’t know” (Kelly, 2006, p. 6). This is only true if every single text is scanned and becomes available. Who would decide what materials to scan? It is difficult to envision the existence of a universal library when those who are motivated by making profits like large publishers in various countries are involved in the process. Technology to establish a digitalized universal library is already here today, but there are still a lot of obstacles that need to be resolved in order to achieve this goal.

Reference:
Kelly, K. (2006). Scan This Book! New York Times, May 14, 2006. Retrieved October 1, 2010,
from http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/14/magazine/14publishing.html

Posted in Commentary 1 | 4 Comments