WordPress Updates

You know you haven’t posted to your blog in a while when WordPress asks you to skip three updates at once. I’ll be back soonish. I promise. After I get done writing this toolkit for the Library Pooled Fund.

Better yet, I also got around to configuring the FTP setup for my parent’s farm website. They’re starting a goat cheese dairy, and my brother’s girlfriend has offered to build the site. Since she’s going to school for graphic design it makes more sense for her to build it than me.  Especially after I accidentally nuked their old one when registering a new domain name. My “quick fix” is pretty obvious…

Maybe I’ll get around to reading some of this later today too. Kinda fits with everything I’ve talked about over the past year or two.

Mitt Romney: Believe in Self-Publishing

Politics is about kissing babies and winning votes. So, it comes as no surprise when I come across a pie-in-the-sky, idealistic set of prescriptions from any political candidate. That’s what politicians do! They come up with plans that won’t be followed up on.

I kid. But, I am also somewhat serious. So it’s not unexpected that Mitt Romney’s “Believe in America” plan seems to be somewhat lacking.

Make no mistake, I’m not qualified to judge his proposals. They might even be what the country needs. But, they aren’t presented in a form that reflects what they are; politically motivated sketches that have been crafted, no pushed, during a Republican Party primary.

Case in point: the file is available online in .pdf format and through Amazon as an e-book. It looks slick. It contains lots of charts. It even references 127 endnotes. On the verso it provides copyright information and notes that this is its “first edition.” Romney’s plan is, in every sense of the form, a traditional publication.

Except it isn’t.

Though the plan reads like a book and looks like a book, it’s not one. It’s a slick, self-published document. And, that is something very different from what politicians have produced in the past. To my knowledge anyway.

No doubt, similar material has been produced by other presidential candidates. But, Romney has done something different… and potentially misleading. His campaign has produced an plan that takes full advantage of digital publication tools. It presents the facade of procedural rigor without the underlying requirement of it.

That is to say, his plan has not been scored by the Congressional Budget Office. It has not been peer-reviewed. It has not jumped through numerous procedural hoops. And, it did not get approved by an editor who had to take into account if it’s conclusions would reflect poorly on the publishing organization. In a sense, Romey’s plan has gone directly to “go.” It has collected $200 without rolling the dice.

Thanks to Adobe Acrobat, Microsoft Word, and other tools the Romney campaign has created something that, once upon a time, would have required a formal process. Self-publishing is so pervasive, so cheap, so convincing, today that it doesn’t require a critique of content anymore. Now anybody can make their document look like a formal publication.

Therein lies the problem.

Because Romney’s plan is stamped with the “Paid for by Mitt Romney for President” identifier, we can tell it’s not an objective set of prescriptions. We can tell it was put together using campaign dollars; likely in-house.

Objectivity may only be something to aim for, but it a world where anybody can make a plan look well-reasoned the processes used to create it matters most of all.

Wow! Three months…

It’s been a long time since I posted. I’m sorry. Will you forgive me? May was eaten up by changes at work, June by travel and July by catching up. Fortunately, things are starting to settle and I’ll be back to blogging soon.

Stay tuned. Hopefully not for too long.

Another Scientific Method?

I’m obsessed with quick and free information. I’ll admit that. Just as much, I’m obsessed with what that means for the public. Democracies thrive off of an informed, voting populace. It comes as a paradox then that increasing information accessibility doesn’t guarantee it’s quality. Only it’s volume.

If you turn up the volume to a bad song, its still going to suck. Sorry Milli Vanilli. You can sing “Girl You Know” as loud as you want, but that won’t help.

So, how can we solve this problem? I’m not sure but it seems to me that Librarians need to start pushing educators to emphasize the scientific method (and basic principles of evidence) more. It’s not enough to know how to research things. People can find anything they want. Instead, the public needs to be able to: 1) test the information they find and 2) be able to identify how well reasoned it is. Because not every question can be tested, the second skill will likely be used more often than the first.

As to the first? I can’t help but wonder, “are there ways to better test the validity of online information?” Is there a way to apply the scientific method that integrates clearly into the electronic environment?

Public Library Movement?

A few weeks ago, Robert Darnton – the Director of Harvard’s libraries – wrote an editorial for the New York Times. Recently, a judge overruled the now (in)famous Google Books settlement, and Mr. Darnton wisely reiterated what appears to be everyone’s vision. A universal, free, and public digital library. I suggest you take a moment to reflect on this vision.

It’s the public library movement of our time.