1

WALDO(WestchesterAcademicLibraryDirectorsOrganization)

LIBRARIANSHIPANDINFORMATIONLITERACYINTHEPOST-TRUTHERA

Tuesday,June13,2017,WalshLibrary,FordhamUniversity(RoseHillcampus)

Keynoteaddress:Privatizationofgovernmentinformationfromthe1980stotoday.DebbieRabina.PrattInstitute,NewYork.I. AcknowledgementsandintroductionThankyouMustafa[Sakaraya],LindaLoschiavo,andtothemembersandguestsoftheWestchesterAcademicLibraryDirectorsOrganization,forallowingmetospeakheretodayandsharewithyousomehistoryandthoughtsonthetopicofprivatizinggovernmentinformation.IadmitthatwhenIsentMustafatheabstractofmytalkheretoday,IhadonlyavaguesenseofwhatIwantedtotalkabout.Now,afewmonthslater,Ihaveanevenvaguersense.ThetopicwastriggeredbyanemailthatIreceivedsometimethiswinter,fromPollyThistlethwaite,whomI’msuremanyofyouknow.Pollywrotethatshehadbeenwonderinglatelyabouthowthehistoryofprivatizationplaysintoopenaccess,andaskedifIhadanysuggestedreading.Well,itsohappenedthatIdid.Sometimeinthe90’sasaPhDstudent,Iwroteapaperonprivatizinggovernmentinformation,soIknewabitofthehistory,andafewcasestudies,anddecidedtoseewhateverhappenedtothosecases,andhowdoesprivatizationplaysouttoday.Thisisstillverymucharesearchinthemaking,andIapologizeifthismaysoundalittlemorelikework-in-progressthanakeynote.Iamhopingyourquestionsandcommentswillhelpmeinshapingthisresearch.II. Theoutline[slide2]Thispaperwishestoexamineaphenomenonthathasbecomepracticedsincethe1980’s:theprivatizationofinformationservices.Wewilltrytounderstandthephenomenonbyexaminingitsextentandscope(whichkindofinformationservicesarebeingprivatized,andwhere)anditseffects.

2

WhiletheUSgovernment’sinformationpolicyisdisperse,thereareconsistentprinciplesthatemergethatformthebasesforUSinformationpolicy.TheseprinciplesarederivedfromtheFirstAmendment,fromFOIA,fromCopyrightLaw,fromsunshinelaws,fromlaws,CircularsandDirectives.[slide3]Agoodarticulationoftheseprinciplesisavailablefroma1990NCLISreport1:

1.Thepublichasarightofaccesstopublicinformation.

2.TheFederalGovernmentshouldguaranteetheintegrityandpreservationofpublicinformation,regardlessofitsformat.3.TheFederalGovernmentshouldguaranteethedissemination,reproductionandredistributionofpublicinformation.4.TheFederalGovernmentshouldensureawidediversityofsourcesofaccess,privateaswellasgovernmental,topublicinformation.5.TheFederalGovernmentshouldnotallowcosttoobstructthepublic’saccesstopublicinformation.

Theprinciplescoveraccess,availabilityandpreservationofinformation,althoughitisworthnotingthatthereisnocommitmentthatgovernmentcollectinformation.Thus,throughoutthispaper,wewillconsidertheadvisabilityofprivatizinggovernmentinformationwhileexaminingtheeffectithasonaccesstoandavailabilityofgovernmentinformation.

[slide4]Whatwillfollownowisanexaminationofthesequestionsistwelvestepsand24slides.

III. ThecontextWhileImaynotbedirectlytyingthetopicofprivatizinginformationtothethemeofthisconference,LibraryandInformationLiteracyinthePost-TruthEra,Iwouldliketoaskthatyouhavethisthemeinmindandexploretheconnectionbetweenthem.Thetopicofthistalkmaybeabitacademic,butthecontextisverymuchwithinthescopeofouracademiceverydaylifewithinlibrariesandgovernmentinformationplaysanimportantroleininformationliteracy.[slide5]IlikethequotefromAlexPang2thatMustafahasinhissignaturefile:

1 NCLIS,“principlesofPublicInformation,”FederalRegister55(11December1990):50899-50900.Thenumberingoftheprinciplesappearsastheyarepublishedintheofficialrecord. 2AlexSoojung-KimPang(2012Feb6)“iflibrariesdidnotexist,itwouldbenecessarytoinventthem”.DeliberateRestblog.http://www.deliberate.rest/?p=1792

3

Today'slibrariesareincubators,collaboratories,themodernequivalentofthe17th-centurycoffeehouse:partinformationmarket,partknowledgewarehouse,withsomeworkshopthrowninforgoodmeasure--AlexSoojung-KimPang

Itisthespecificallythefirsttwofunctions–informationmarket,andknowledgewarehouse,thatprovidethecontextandbeartheimpactofprivatization.IV. Whyprivatization,whynow?Alittlebitaboutthehistoryandwhyisitworthrevisitingtoday.[slide6]Privatization,inallitsforms,variationsanddisguises(outsourcing,downsizing,cost-effectiveness,efficiency,accountability)arealwaysonthetable,aretraditionallyontheagendaofRepublicansandwerepracticedwidelyintheUKduringtheThatcheryears,andintheUSbytheReaganadministration.PrivatizationisalsoconsistentwithTrump’seconomicvision.[slide7]Justafewdaysagoheendorsedaplantoprivatizethenation’sair-trafficcontrolsystem3.Whileprivatizationofinformationhasneverdeliveredonitspromise,itcontinuestobediscussed.PrivatizationcandidatesareorcanincludeallformsofgovernmentinformationincludingsomestaplesastheAmericanCommunitySurvey,EPApublications,gatewayssuchasdata.govandScience.gov,theactivitiesorcontentfromGPO,movingcopyrightmanagementfromLoCDoCommerce,open-accesslegislationandmanymore.Alltheseprogramandsourcesofinformationanddataareendangered.[slide8]Whilemanydefinitionabide,forourpurposeswewillusethedefinitionfroma2014HouseofCommonsreport4:

Privatisation:Thetransferofresponsibilityforanindustryortheownershipofacompanyfromthepublictotheprivatesector.

Asperthereport,interestinprivatizationwasanimportantcomponentofeconomicpolicy(intheUK)from1980s(BritishPetroleum1979)untilthemid-1990s(BritishCoal1994)5.After2010,interestinthepolicyasaneconomictoolintheUKrevived.

3JulieHirshfeldDavisandKateKellyJune2017.TrumpPlanstoShiftInfrastructureFundingtoCities,StatesandBusiness.TheNewYorkTimeshttps://nyti.ms/2sBOQ7f4Privatisation.(20Nov2014)Researchpaper14/61.UKHouseofCommonsLibraryhttp://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/RP14-61#fullreport5Parker,David(2004).TheUK'sPrivatisationExperiment:ThePassageofTimePermitsaSoberAssessment.CESIFOworkingpaperno.1126Category9:IndustrialOrganisationFeb2004,PresentedatCESIFOconferenceonprivatisationexperiencesintheEUNov2003

4

[slide9]ThisparallelsinterestintheUS,wherethevogueforprivatizationbeganintheReaganyearsandacceleratedinthe1990s.DuringtheReganyears,producinganddisseminatingfederalinformationhadtobeonacost-justificationbase.Butprivatizationwasnottheonlyforceshapingfederalinformationinthe1980s.Addtothis,asSnowhilldoes,“thegrowingrestrictiononaccesstogovernmentinformation,therapidandpervasivedevelopmentofelectronicformats,andtheweakeningofthelegislativeoversightoftheexecutivebranch”6.

Withthepassageoftime,researchersareevaluatingprivatization.Assummarizedinthe2014articleintheAtlantic7,privatizationhasfailedtodeliverthepublicgooditspromises(fromHalliburtontoHealthcare.govtoprivateprisons),yetthepracticecontinuesthroughcontractsthatstilllegallybind,andthroughnewinitiativessuchasprivatizingairtrafficcontrol.

[slide10]V. Whyprivatize?TheeconomicvalueofinformationNoneedtogetverboseaboutthat–weallknowthatthedeterminingfactoriscuttingcosts.Butevengovernmentsometimeslikestojustifytheiractionintheory.Thesetheorieschangeaccordingtowhoisatthehelm,andtheygettoshapepoliciesbasedontheirviewoftheroleofgovernmentandtheirpreferredeconomic/socialworldview.Privatizationisahighlydebatedtopicwithregardtomanygovernmentfunctionsandtheargumentsonbothsidesarestrong.Privatizinginformation,orforourpurposes,libraryfunctions,requiresustounderstandtheeconomicvalueofinformation.Athoroughexaminationisoutsidethescopeofourtalk,butweallunderstandthatthereissomeunderlyingassumptionthatinformationhasvalue,otherwisetherewouldbenoincentivefortheprivatesectortotakeonthisfunction.Batesconsiderstheelusivenatureofinformationasacommodity,andattemptspinitdownintermsofwelfareeconomics,publicgood,socialefficiencyandmore.Heconcludes,“thevalueofinformationisprobabilistic,ratherthandeterministic,anddependsonthereturnsfrom(future)useofinformation.Batesaddsthatthestockvalueofinformationmaybeaffectedbythetransferof

6Snowhill,Lucia(1989)Privatizationandavailabilityoffederalinformationinmicroform:TheReaganyears.MicroformReview18:203-2097Ball,Molly(23April2014)ThePrivatizationBacklash.TheAtlantic.https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/04/city-state-governments-privatization-contracting-backlash/361016/

5

theinformationtoothers.8VarianandShapirodiscussprivatizationandoutsourcingasanunderlyingprincipleofinformationpolicyandsuggestthat,withsomelimitations(primarilysecurityandprivacyconcerns)governmentneednotundertaketheactualproductionofinformationitselfandthatcontractorsmaybeabletodoabetterjob9

[slide11]Bringingthismorecloselytothefieldoflibrariesandcollection,Iwanttopointtotwoundatedblogposts(probablyabout3yearsold)thatlistreasonsfor10andagainst11privatizationofpubliclibrariesintheUK.Theargumentsconsiderprivatizationintermsofcostssaving,governance,andpublicgood.Amongtheargumentsisthat

“Librarieswillloseboththeiruniquesellingpointandtheirequallyimportantneutrality.”

Itisthispointthatworriesmethemostaboutextensiveprivatizationoflibrary content–ifwedon’townit,ifwedon’tcontrolit,wearenotfreetouseit.And aslongasweareundercommercialcontract,wearenotfree.

I’dlikeinthiscontexttoquoteJimmyWales,co-founderofWikipediaina2016interview12[slide12]

Andsoit’soneofthethingsthatpeoplesay,“Well,whydon’tyouputadsinWikipedia?Whykeephavingtoraisemoneyasacharity?”AndoneofthethingsIsayis,nomatterhowmuchIbelievethatwewouldcontinue,orthatIwouldwantustocontinue,justintheDNAoftheorganization,organizationsalwaystendtofollowthemoney.Andit’snotthatWikipediawouldturnevil,butitwouldcertainlyturnlessinterestedinthedevelopingworld.Itwouldbecomemoreinterestedinwhatyou’rereadingatWikipedia.Soifeverybody’sreadingaboutElizabethanPoetry,there’snothingtosellthem.WereallywantyoutoreadabouthotelsinLasVegasandthingsthathavegoodadrevenue.Andsosuddenlyyoudo.Nomatterhowhardyoutry,itwouldchangetheincentives

8Bates,BenjaminJ.Informationasaneconomicgood.In:Ruben,B.D.(1990).Mediation,informationandcommunication.NewBrunswick:TransactionPubl.9Shapiro,Carl,Varian,HalR.(1997).USinformationpolicy.PresentedatHighlandsForum,DepartmentofDefense,June8,1997,Wash-ington,DC.SponsoredbytheOfficeoftheAssistantSecretaryofDefense(Command,Control,CommunicationsandIntelligence).10Privatisationofpubliclibraries:reasonsinfavourhttp://www.publiclibrariesnews.com/campaigning/privatized-libraries-outsourcing-library-services/pro11Privatisationofpubliclibraries–Reasonsagainsthttp://www.publiclibrariesnews.com/campaigning/privatized-libraries-outsourcing-library-services/con12JimmyWales(8Sept2016)Thesumofallhumanknowledge[interviewwithKristaTippett]OnBeinghttps://onbeing.org/programs/jimmy-wales-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge-2/

6

oftheorganizationtotrytochangetheshapeofWikipediaratherthanbeingthisreallypure,community-drivenpublicservicemission.

[slide13]VI. PrivatizationintheUK1979-2001MargaretThatcher,electedin1979,madeprivatizationacenterpieceofhereconomicpolicy.Between1979and2001theUKgovernmentprivatizedover50companies,mostlyinutilities(power,water),telecommunication,railandmore13.IntheUKthe1983InformationTechnologyAdvisoryBoard’s(ITAP)reportMakingabusinessofinformationtreatedgovernmentinformationasapurelycommercialproductandasanactivityforbusinesswiththeemphasisontradableinformation14.AmongtheservicesprivatizedwasHMSO–HerMajesty’sStationaryOffice.ThinkofHSMOasaUKequivalentofGPOinthatitproducedanddisseminatedofficialgovernmentinformation.

HMSO,muchlikeGPOhasalonghistory15withmanysimilarities.Itwasfoundedin1786ironicallyasameasureagainstcorruptionandexploitationfromthepublicsectorforstationarysupply16.[slide14]ButtheinformationpolicycontextintheUKwasdifferentthanintheUS,especiallyin1980.TheUKdidnothaveaFreedomofInformationActuntil2000,andtheUKhasCrowncopyright,meaningUKgovernmentpublicationsarenotinthepublicdomain.Theinclusionofgovernmentpublicationincopyrightprotectionisofspecialsignificancesinceitpermitstheexclusionoftheprivatesectororthemaintenanceofexclusivearrangementswithpreferredfranchisees.UndertheBerneConventionmostinternationalcopyrightissuesareuniform,exceptArticle2Sections4,whichallowscountriestodetermineforthemselveswhetherornotcopyrightwillincludegovernmentinformation17.InEngland,forexample,the

13Parker,David(2004).TheUK'sPrivatisationExperiment:ThePassageofTimePermitsaSoberAssessment.PresentedatCESIFOConference,Nov2003(availablefromSSRN).14 InformationTechnologyAdvisoryPanel.Makingabusinessofinformation:asurveyofnewopportunities.HMSP,1983. 15DetailedhistoryofHMSO:HerMajesty’sStationaryOfficehistory,Source:InternationalDirectoryofCompanyHistories,Vol.7.St.JamesPress,1993.ReproducedbyFundingUniverse:http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/her-majesty-s-stationery-office-history/16OfficeofPublicSectorInformation.Wikipedia.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Public_Sector_InformationandHSMOHistoryhttp://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/her-majesty-s-stationery-office-history/17 PeterN.WeissandPeterBacklund(1996).“InternationalInformationPolicyinConflict”TheComputerLawandSecurityReport,12at384.

7

doctrineofCrownCopyrightextendstovirtuallyanythingthatisnotcopyrightedbyaprivateentity18.InadditiontoCrownCopyright,theUKparliamentmaintainsParliamentaryCopyrightonitspublications,whichallowsgreaterfreedominreproducingsomeparliamentarymaterialbecauseofitsuniquenature19.CrowncopyrightisjustoneofmanyinstancesofhowinformationisregardedintheUKtobeacommodity.In1979,withtheelectionofMargaretThatcher,HMSOneededtodemonstratenewcostefficiencyatanycost.FirstHMSO'sstaffwascutby10percentin1980andfuturecutsfollowed.Thatsameyear,HMSOwontherighttochargegovernmentclientsfortheirorders,shiftingthebudgetaryburdenfromHMSOtocustomers,whofoundnewincentivestocutwaste.HMSOwasprivatizedincrementallybetween1980and1985andfullprivatizationannouncedinparliamentin1995.TodayTSOfunctionsasafullycommercialbusinesswiththeexclusionofasmallsetofparliamentarypublications.

WhichcopyrightwillapplytoHMSOpublicationsafterprivatizationwasattheheartofthedebatein1995.OnOctober19th.1995,theBritishgovernmentannouncedtheprivatizationofHMSO.ThiscausedanuproarinParliament,andraisedconsiderableconcernregardingtheeffectofcurrentpricinglevelsofparliamentarymaterialsonpublicaccesstoinformation.Theconcernwasrootedinrecentexperiencesoftheresultsofamorecommercialapproachtopublishinganddistributinggovernmentinformation.Afterprivatization,HMSOlostitscontracttopublishtheBusinessmonitorsproductionseriestoTaylorNelson.Oneofthemajoreffectsofthischangehasbeenonprice:Businessmonitorsweremodestlypricedat9.35Poundsforannual,and25Poundsforquarterlymonitors.TheyhavebeenrepackagedasUKMarketsin91annualand36quarterlyreports,pricedatbetween65Poundsand225Poundseach(or4,950forthecompleteset).TaylorNelsonsuppliesthedataonCD-ROMandbyfaxbut,sincetheydon’thaveadistributionnetwork,thehard-copyreportsaresoldontheirbehalfbyHMSO.Theotherimportanteffectisontherighttocopydata.TaylorNelsonclaimthateachA4unit(eachpage)isanindividualcopyrightworkandcannotbecopiedundertheusualfairdealingprovision.Thisisanexampleofgovernmentdata,collectedatthetaxpayer’sexpense,beingsoldforahighpricebyacommercialpublisher,withsevererestrictionsonuseofthedata20.

18 Marshall(1993)“CrownCopyright:NavigatingtheWaters”.CanadianLawLibraries18(4). 19 DavidButcher(1995).“BritishOfficialPublishing:FutureUncertain”.TheLawLibrarian26(4)at489. 20 Butcherat490.

8

TheBritishLibraryAssociationalsoexpressedanxietyovertheprivatizationofHMSO,andwasespeciallyconcernedwithsafeguardingthepublicinformationroleofgovernmentpublications,HMSO’sbibliographicfunctionsandthediscountsHMSOgivestomanylibraries21.Publiclibrarianshavepointedoutthat,apartfromtheincreaseinprice,thereisnoincentiveforthemtopurchasetheTaylorNelsondata,sincetheywillbeunabletopermittheirreaderstophotocopyanyway22.

[slide15]VII. Privatizationofgov’tinformation–US,1980’sWritingin1989,Moodywritesthatthe“Reaganadministrationseemsnottoseegovernmentinformationasasocialgoodbutasacommercialproduct.Thegrowthofthisfree-enterpriseideahashadtwodistinctresults:(1)thegovernmentitselfistreatinginformationasacommodityforwhichitneedstochargeitsusersincreasinglyhigherprices;(2)thegovernmentisencouragingtheprivatizationofpublicinformation.Thesaleofinformationcollectedattaxpayers'expensebytheprivatesector23.Moodyprovidesexamplesandnumbersthatillustratetheconsequencesofprivatizationforjournalaccess.Overallfollowingoutsourcingandprivatizationjournalaccesswasweakened.Sometitleswenolongerdistributedtodepositorylibraries,HHS(HealthandHumanServices)periodicalssawaprintincreaseof82.4%..PopulartitlessuchasOccupationalOutlookHandbookincreased8.50to20$.Takeonenarrowinterestjournal–NavelResearchLogisticsQuarterly.BeforeprivatizingNTISiswasfreetoFDLPlibraries,was$22annuallyfromGPO,andafterpassingproductiontoWileywasnolongeravailabletoFDLPlibrariesandsubscriptionscostincreasedby270%.

TwocasestudiesinprivatizationareNTISandLandSat.Forlackoftime,wewillfocusonthecaseofLandSatasNTISisalittlemorefamiliartothegeneralpublic

[slide16]VII.1 Landsat5ThecaseofprivatizingLandsat5,maynotbewidelyknown,butitiswellresearched,includingabookandscholarlyarticles.Agoodsummaryisavailable

21 “UproaroverHMSOprivatization”.LibraryAssociationRecord98(2):58 22 HowardPicton(1996).“Accessofofficialpublications:threatsandresponses”.Refer12(2)at11 23Moody,Marilyn(1989)Governmentinformation.RQ26(4):425-433

9

froma2009NASAupdate,nowavailableonlyonthewaybackmachine,andarchivedthroughtheEndofTermHarvest:24[slide17]ThelandRemote-SensingSatellite(Landsat)programconsistsoffivesatelliteslaunchedbytheFederalgovernmentfrom1972to1984.TheSatellitescarrysensorscalled“multispectralScanners”and“ThematicMappers”,whichrecordandmeasureelectromagneticenergyreflectedfromscenesorobjectsonearth,andtransmitthemtoreceivingstationsontheground.Thesedatacanbeturnedintophotographicimagesorothergraphicalformatsforuseinapplicationsinagriculture,forestry,fishing,mineralexploration,landandwaterresources,management,hydrology,geologyandmapping,pollutionmonitoring,andcoastalzonemanagement.ThedataareusedprimarilybyagenciesoftheFederalgovernment,stateandlocalofficials,foreigngovernments,researchers,andselectedprivatecompanies25.

[slide18]PresidentCartermadethefirstpolicydecisionleadingtocommercializationin1979andtheelectionofReaganacceleratedtheprocessandmovingtheprojectfromNASAtoNOAA26.TheyearLandsat5waslaunchedCongressdecidedthatlandsatellitescouldbeprivatized(1984LandRemoteSensingCommercializationAct)27.NOAA,theagencyinchargeofallLandsatoperations,wasinstructedtofindacommercialvendorforLandsatdata.NOAAselectedEarthObservationSatelliteCompany(EOSAT).ThecontractgaveEOSATtheresponsibilityforarchiving,collectinganddistributingcurrentLandsatdataaswellastheresponsibilityforbuilding,launchingandoperatingthefollowingtwoLandsatsatellites(withgovernmentsubsidies).

Eisenbeis’studyrevealedunfortunatechangesinaccess,availabilityandpreservationofLandsatdatasincetheoperationofthesystemsbyEOSAT.Pricesforphotographicimages,theleastexpensivetypeofLandsatdataavailable,increasedgraduallyuntil1989whenpricesroseasmuchas500%.WhileEOSAT

24NASA.(14May2009)Landsat5.Origingallink[http://landsat.gsfc.nasa.gov/about/landsat5.html]Waybackmachinehttp://eot.us.archive.org/eot/20090514050613/http://landsat.gsfc.nasa.gov/about/landsat5.html25 EvanMcKenzie(1996).“Privatizinggovernmentinformation”.Governmentinformationquarterly13(3),at338. 26Landsatprogram.Wikipedia.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landsat_programaccess6/9/17.27 LandRemote-SensingCommercializationActof1984,U.S.Code,vol.15,secs.4201-92(1988).

10

didofferawidervarietyofproductswithcostsavingsforthemostexpensiveproducts,thelessexpensiveoneshadeitherincreasedsignificantlyinpriceorwerenolongeravailable.ProductavailabilitywasannouncedinvariousEOSATpublication,ranginginpricefromafreenewsletter,toaMultispecturalUser’sGuidewhichcost$975.PreservationwasaffectedbyEOSAT’sstrategyofoperatingthesatellitesensorsonlywhenfillingapurchaseorder.Thisstrategyreducedthesizeofthelandremotesensingdataarchivebyeliminatingaregular,continuousdataflow.Toresearchersexploringglobalenvironmentalchange,thelossofarepetitiveandcontinuousdatastream,aswellastheinterruptiontothelengthofrecordfortheLandsatdata,wasunconscionable.CustomersarerequiredbyEOSATtosignapre-purchaseagreementwhichrestrictsuseofLandsatdatabyeliminatingthepurchaser’srighttoreproduceorsharethedata.Lackingatruecopyright,EOSAThopedtopreventunauthorizeddisclosureofLandsatdataandtostopthedata-swappingcustomaryamongacademicusers28.EisenbeisconcludedthattheLandsatActallowedtheDepartmentofCommercetoenterintoancontractwithEOSATwhichenablesthecompanytotreatapublicgood(Landsatdata)asaprivategood29.[slide19]ThelessonoftheLandsatsatellitedatahadbeenlearned.Intheclosingdaysofthe102dCongress,legislatorspassedPublicLaw102-55530,whichrepealstheLandRemoste-SensingCommercializationActof1984,thusendingthe“experiment”whichsonegativelyaffectedtheresearchuseofremotesensingdataacquiredfromtheLandsatsatellites31

WhereisLandsatnow?

“Giventhisoutcryandtheunexpectedoutcomeofprivatization,theBushAdministrationfacilitatedtheLandRemoteSensingPolicyActof1992,whichinstructedLandsatProgramManagementtobuildagovernment-ownedLandsat7.TwoyearsafterthelaunchofLandsat7,SpaceImaging(formerlyEOSAT)returnedoperationalresponsibilityforLandsat4andLandsat5backtotheU.S.Government.OnJuly1,200lwhenoperationalcontrolwasofficiallyreturnedtothefederalgovernment,SpaceImagingalsorelinquishedtheircommercialrighttoLandsat

28 Eisenbeis,at141-144. 29 Eisenbeis,at150. 30 LandRemoteSensingPolicyActof1992,U.S.Code,vol15,secs.5601-72(1992). 31 Eisenbeis,at157.

11

data,enablingtheUSGStosellallLandsat4andLandsat5datainaccordancewiththeUSGSpricingpolicy.”32

[slide20]VIII. PrivatizationandFreedomofInformationTheFreedomofInformationAct,animportantyetflawedmechanismforreceivingpublicinformation,willwithoutadoubt,beweakenedbyprivatization.Whileintheory,atleastatthefederallevels,contractorsmuchcomplywithFOIA,therealityisthattheydon’t.Theweakening,orreducedaccountability,wasalsonotedina2006CRSreport33.JournalistsandFirstAmendmentgroupsprovideevidencetotheproblemonboththestateandfederallevels34.Onthestatelevel,alawreviewarticlefrom200035,writtenatthepeakofthelastwaveofinterest,cautionsthat“moststatestatutesprovidingforfreedomofaccesstogovernmentdocumentsdonotexplicitlygrantaccesstodocumentsthatareinthehandsofprivateentities”.[slide21+22]IX. Privatizationandtheroleofthelibraryasinformationmarket.Iknowfrommyexperienceasaneducator,thatstudentsaresurprisedwhentheyfirstlearninclassabouttheeconomicforcesthatrulethelibrary,andtheyaresurprisedwhenIspendagoodpartofmygeneralreferencecoursetalkingaboutmergersandacquisitions.Oftentheeffectsofprivatizationonresearchoutputaredifficulttoassessduetothechallengesofmeasuringactivitythatfailedtoexist.Partnershipswithprivatesectortodigitizematerials,havefailedtoprovidebenefitstolibrary,andoneneedonlymentiontheGooglebooksprojects.Librariansandarchivistshavemadegreatefforttomakeprintpublicrecordsaccessible,butquestionsareemergingarounddigitalaccessandhowto“sustainablyfunddigitizationprojects

32NASA.(14May2009)Landsat5.Origingallink[http://landsat.gsfc.nasa.gov/about/landsat5.html]Waybackmachinehttp://eot.us.archive.org/eot/20090514050613/http://landsat.gsfc.nasa.gov/about/landsat5.html33Kosar,KevinD.(28Dec2006).PrivatizationandtheFederalGovernment:AnIntroduction:CRSReportforCongress.https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc815384/34Barstow,DavidT.(2010).TheFreedomofinformationActandtheFreedomofthePress:ObstructionorTransparency?SocialScience77(3):805-810.35Feiser,Graig,G.(2000).Protectingthepublic’srighttoknow:Thedebateoverprivatizationandaccesstogovernmentinformationunderstatelaw.FloridaStateUniversityLawReview27(4)

12

forrecordsheldinpublicinstitutionsandwhoshouldpayforvalue-addedsearchanddiscoverytoolstofacilitateuseofthedigitizedrecords”.36[slide23]X. Privatizationandtheroleofthelibraryasknowledgewarehouse.Ihavesatthroughendlesspanelsandreadendlesspapersdebating“whatisinformation”andIhavenointentionofignitingthatdebatehere.ForourpurposesIwillinterpretAlexPang’sknowledgewarehouseasourlibrarycollections(anequallygoodalternativeisthatourknowledgewarehousearelibrarians,butthatwillbetoomuchofadigressionforthistalk).Collections,particularlywhenitcomestogovernmentinformation,isoneofthesoapboxesIstandIwheneverIhaveanopportunity.Ilosesleepoverthefactthatmanyofushavegivenuponcollectionsinfavoroflinking.Andtrustme,Idogetboththeadvantagesandtheinevitabilityoflinking.Inaworldwherewelicensecontent,whatLorcanDempsycallthefacilitatedmodel,governmentcollectionsofferusanopportunitytoan‘owned’model,wherelibrarieshavephysicalcustodyofitems37andatthesametimeparticipateinthefacilitatedmodel.IwouldliketoquoteDempsydirectlyhere,askyoutoreadthiswithme,andpauseonthebold(inoriginal)sectionsoncollectionsasaservice.

Thereissomediscussionaboutashiftfromcollectionstoservices.AnotherwayofthinkingaboutwhatIhavecalledthefacilitatedcollectionhereistomovetowardsthinkingaboutcollectionsasaservice.Librarieswillcontinuetobuildcollections,althoughthelevelofactivitywilldifferacrosslibraries.Atthesametime,itseemslikelythatfacilitatedcollectionsofvarioustypeswillgrowinimportance.

Tome,collectionsasaservice,meansonething–ifwearenotcollectingforouruserswearenotdoingourjob.Thistransition,btw,issimilartoonethatoccurredinreferenceservices,toreferenceasinstruction.Butbacktocollections-as-a-service.Whilewemaydomanythingsinthelibrary,atthecoreofourraisond'etreisthatweareasPangsaidknowledgewarehouse,andthatdependsonstockingourwarehouse,andforthatweneedtocollectlocally.

36Kriesberh,Adam(2014).Public-PrivatePartnershipsandtheFutureofDigitalAccessinUSStateArchives.Proceedingsofthe15thAnnualInternationalConferenceonDigitalGovernmentResearch,pp341-342.ACMDigitalLibrary37LorcanDempsey.Thefacilitatedcollection(2016Jan31)http://orweblog.oclc.org/towards-the-facilitated-collection/

13

Privatizinggovernmentinformationcouldpotentiallyfirstpreventusfromgainingfreeaccesstopublicinformation,andnextpreventusfrommakingthispublicallyavailableundercopyrightrestrictions.Itcouldpotentiallybetreatedaslicensedcontent.

[slide24]

XI. AbreakfromvaluesPrivatizationofgovernmentinformationsignifiesabreakfromthevaluesonwhichourinformationsystemwasfounded.TheUnitedStateshasalongtraditionofviewinginformationasapublicasset,whichbestbenefitsthecitizenrywhenitismadeavailabletothepubliconatimelybasisandinanaccessiblemanner.TheUSgovernment,isamajorcreator,collector,useranddisseminatorofinformation.Soundscientificresearch,thepublichealthandsafety,andtheimpartialcollectionanddistributionoftaxreceiptsareafewofthenationalprioritiesthatdependonfederalinformationsystems38.AmericanfederalinformationpolicyischaracterizedbyanapproachthatreliesonastrongFreedomofInformationAct,nogovernmentcopyright,feeslimitedtocostofdisseminationandnolimitsonuse.Thedesiretocultivateaninformedcitizenryisatthebasisofseverallegislativeacts,meanttoencourageaccesstoofficialinformationTheUSinformationpolicyhassignificantFirstAmendmentcomponents.Onthefederallevel,theseareseenintheCopyright’sAct’sexclusionongovernmentcopyrightandintheFreedomofInformationAct’sinsistencethatgovernmentinformationnotspecificallyexempt,bereleasedatnomorethanthecostofsearchandduplication.Thesevaluesstandinthewayofeffortsbygovernmentagenciestocommercializetheirinformation39.

XII. ConclusionPrivatizationisbecomingincreasinglycommonacrosstheworldbutmeasurableresultsregardingtheadvisabilityofthispracticearejustbeginningtosurface.Thedatathathasemergedsofarseemstoindicatethatprivatizationisnotworkinginfavorofthepublicatwhoseexpenseinformationisgeneratedandwhomitismeanttoserve.Thereseemstobegeneralconfusionamongthoseengaginginprivatizationastothebenefitscosts,bothinmonetaryandpublicservice,ofthisact.Benchmarkingmodelsofferedtostateandlocalagenciesfailtoconsidertheveryessenceofinformationanditsimportancetosociety.Decisionsregardinginformationpolicyaretimeandagainaffectedbyeconomicconsiderations,whilelong-termimplicationsarenottakenintoaccount.The

38 PeterN.WeissandPeterBacklund(1996).“InternationalInformationPolicyinConflict”TheComputerLawandSecurityReport,12at382. 39 PeterN.WeissandPeterBacklund(1996).“InternationalInformationPolicyinConflict”TheComputerLawandSecurityReport,12at384.

14

libraryandinformationcommunityhasreasonforconcernoverthecommercializationofinformationsinceitinterfereswiththeveryessenceofourprofessionalresponsibility.Fromaninternationalperspective,theexistenceofmanydifferent,andoftencontradictorylawsandstatusregardinginformationindifferentcountries,obstructstheunrestrictedflowofinformationthatisnecessaryforacademicresearch,scientificprojectsandforgenerallycreatinganinformedcitizenry.Oneofthegreatdangersofthisphenomenalayinthefactthelibraryandinformationsciencecommunityisatlarge,unawareofthistrend.Privatizationisnotpartofthepolicyagendaofinformationprofessionals.Thiscreatesasituationwhereagradualerosionintheaccess,availabilityandpreservationofpublicinformationisoccurring,embodiedinlegislativeprocedures.WhilethelessonoftheLandsatexperiencehasbeenlearned,privatizationtoitsvariousforms,isstilldeliberatedbymanygovernmentsandgovernmentagencies.Whileitwouldnotbeadvisable,ornecessary,toattempttopreventprivatizationattempts,itisofparamountimpotencethatthoseengaginginitadaptmeasuresandguaranteestoensureunrestrictedaccesstoinformation.

1

WALDO(WestchesterAcademicLibraryDirectorsOrganization)

LIBRARIANSHIPANDINFORMATIONLITERACYINTHEPOST-TRUTHERA

Tuesday,June13,2017,WalshLibrary,FordhamUniversity(RoseHillcampus)

Keynoteaddress:Privatizationofgovernmentinformationfromthe1980stotoday.DebbieRabina.PrattInstitute,NewYork.I. AcknowledgementsandintroductionThankyouMustafa[Sakaraya],LindaLoschiavo,andtothemembersandguestsoftheWestchesterAcademicLibraryDirectorsOrganization,forallowingmetospeakheretodayandsharewithyousomehistoryandthoughtsonthetopicofprivatizinggovernmentinformation.IadmitthatwhenIsentMustafatheabstractofmytalkheretoday,IhadonlyavaguesenseofwhatIwantedtotalkabout.Now,afewmonthslater,Ihaveanevenvaguersense.ThetopicwastriggeredbyanemailthatIreceivedsometimethiswinter,fromPollyThistlethwaite,whomI’msuremanyofyouknow.Pollywrotethatshehadbeenwonderinglatelyabouthowthehistoryofprivatizationplaysintoopenaccess,andaskedifIhadanysuggestedreading.Well,itsohappenedthatIdid.Sometimeinthe90’sasaPhDstudent,Iwroteapaperonprivatizinggovernmentinformation,soIknewabitofthehistory,andafewcasestudies,anddecidedtoseewhateverhappenedtothosecases,andhowdoesprivatizationplaysouttoday.Thisisstillverymucharesearchinthemaking,andIapologizeifthismaysoundalittlemorelikework-in-progressthanakeynote.Iamhopingyourquestionsandcommentswillhelpmeinshapingthisresearch.II. Theoutline[slide2]Thispaperwishestoexamineaphenomenonthathasbecomepracticedsincethe1980’s:theprivatizationofinformationservices.Wewilltrytounderstandthephenomenonbyexaminingitsextentandscope(whichkindofinformationservicesarebeingprivatized,andwhere)anditseffects.

2

WhiletheUSgovernment’sinformationpolicyisdisperse,thereareconsistentprinciplesthatemergethatformthebasesforUSinformationpolicy.TheseprinciplesarederivedfromtheFirstAmendment,fromFOIA,fromCopyrightLaw,fromsunshinelaws,fromlaws,CircularsandDirectives.[slide3]Agoodarticulationoftheseprinciplesisavailablefroma1990NCLISreport1:

1.Thepublichasarightofaccesstopublicinformation.

2.TheFederalGovernmentshouldguaranteetheintegrityandpreservationofpublicinformation,regardlessofitsformat.3.TheFederalGovernmentshouldguaranteethedissemination,reproductionandredistributionofpublicinformation.4.TheFederalGovernmentshouldensureawidediversityofsourcesofaccess,privateaswellasgovernmental,topublicinformation.5.TheFederalGovernmentshouldnotallowcosttoobstructthepublic’saccesstopublicinformation.

Theprinciplescoveraccess,availabilityandpreservationofinformation,althoughitisworthnotingthatthereisnocommitmentthatgovernmentcollectinformation.Thus,throughoutthispaper,wewillconsidertheadvisabilityofprivatizinggovernmentinformationwhileexaminingtheeffectithasonaccesstoandavailabilityofgovernmentinformation.

[slide4]Whatwillfollownowisanexaminationofthesequestionsistwelvestepsand24slides.

III. ThecontextWhileImaynotbedirectlytyingthetopicofprivatizinginformationtothethemeofthisconference,LibraryandInformationLiteracyinthePost-TruthEra,Iwouldliketoaskthatyouhavethisthemeinmindandexploretheconnectionbetweenthem.Thetopicofthistalkmaybeabitacademic,butthecontextisverymuchwithinthescopeofouracademiceverydaylifewithinlibrariesandgovernmentinformationplaysanimportantroleininformationliteracy.[slide5]IlikethequotefromAlexPang2thatMustafahasinhissignaturefile:

1 NCLIS,“principlesofPublicInformation,”FederalRegister55(11December1990):50899-50900.Thenumberingoftheprinciplesappearsastheyarepublishedintheofficialrecord. 2AlexSoojung-KimPang(2012Feb6)“iflibrariesdidnotexist,itwouldbenecessarytoinventthem”.DeliberateRestblog.http://www.deliberate.rest/?p=1792

3

Today'slibrariesareincubators,collaboratories,themodernequivalentofthe17th-centurycoffeehouse:partinformationmarket,partknowledgewarehouse,withsomeworkshopthrowninforgoodmeasure--AlexSoojung-KimPang

Itisthespecificallythefirsttwofunctions–informationmarket,andknowledgewarehouse,thatprovidethecontextandbeartheimpactofprivatization.IV. Whyprivatization,whynow?Alittlebitaboutthehistoryandwhyisitworthrevisitingtoday.[slide6]Privatization,inallitsforms,variationsanddisguises(outsourcing,downsizing,cost-effectiveness,efficiency,accountability)arealwaysonthetable,aretraditionallyontheagendaofRepublicansandwerepracticedwidelyintheUKduringtheThatcheryears,andintheUSbytheReaganadministration.PrivatizationisalsoconsistentwithTrump’seconomicvision.[slide7]Justafewdaysagoheendorsedaplantoprivatizethenation’sair-trafficcontrolsystem3.Whileprivatizationofinformationhasneverdeliveredonitspromise,itcontinuestobediscussed.PrivatizationcandidatesareorcanincludeallformsofgovernmentinformationincludingsomestaplesastheAmericanCommunitySurvey,EPApublications,gatewayssuchasdata.govandScience.gov,theactivitiesorcontentfromGPO,movingcopyrightmanagementfromLoCDoCommerce,open-accesslegislationandmanymore.Alltheseprogramandsourcesofinformationanddataareendangered.[slide8]Whilemanydefinitionabide,forourpurposeswewillusethedefinitionfroma2014HouseofCommonsreport4:

Privatisation:Thetransferofresponsibilityforanindustryortheownershipofacompanyfromthepublictotheprivatesector.

Asperthereport,interestinprivatizationwasanimportantcomponentofeconomicpolicy(intheUK)from1980s(BritishPetroleum1979)untilthemid-1990s(BritishCoal1994)5.After2010,interestinthepolicyasaneconomictoolintheUKrevived.

3JulieHirshfeldDavisandKateKellyJune2017.TrumpPlanstoShiftInfrastructureFundingtoCities,StatesandBusiness.TheNewYorkTimeshttps://nyti.ms/2sBOQ7f4Privatisation.(20Nov2014)Researchpaper14/61.UKHouseofCommonsLibraryhttp://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/RP14-61#fullreport5Parker,David(2004).TheUK'sPrivatisationExperiment:ThePassageofTimePermitsaSoberAssessment.CESIFOworkingpaperno.1126Category9:IndustrialOrganisationFeb2004,PresentedatCESIFOconferenceonprivatisationexperiencesintheEUNov2003

4

[slide9]ThisparallelsinterestintheUS,wherethevogueforprivatizationbeganintheReaganyearsandacceleratedinthe1990s.DuringtheReganyears,producinganddisseminatingfederalinformationhadtobeonacost-justificationbase.Butprivatizationwasnottheonlyforceshapingfederalinformationinthe1980s.Addtothis,asSnowhilldoes,“thegrowingrestrictiononaccesstogovernmentinformation,therapidandpervasivedevelopmentofelectronicformats,andtheweakeningofthelegislativeoversightoftheexecutivebranch”6.

Withthepassageoftime,researchersareevaluatingprivatization.Assummarizedinthe2014articleintheAtlantic7,privatizationhasfailedtodeliverthepublicgooditspromises(fromHalliburtontoHealthcare.govtoprivateprisons),yetthepracticecontinuesthroughcontractsthatstilllegallybind,andthroughnewinitiativessuchasprivatizingairtrafficcontrol.

[slide10]V. Whyprivatize?TheeconomicvalueofinformationNoneedtogetverboseaboutthat–weallknowthatthedeterminingfactoriscuttingcosts.Butevengovernmentsometimeslikestojustifytheiractionintheory.Thesetheorieschangeaccordingtowhoisatthehelm,andtheygettoshapepoliciesbasedontheirviewoftheroleofgovernmentandtheirpreferredeconomic/socialworldview.Privatizationisahighlydebatedtopicwithregardtomanygovernmentfunctionsandtheargumentsonbothsidesarestrong.Privatizinginformation,orforourpurposes,libraryfunctions,requiresustounderstandtheeconomicvalueofinformation.Athoroughexaminationisoutsidethescopeofourtalk,butweallunderstandthatthereissomeunderlyingassumptionthatinformationhasvalue,otherwisetherewouldbenoincentivefortheprivatesectortotakeonthisfunction.Batesconsiderstheelusivenatureofinformationasacommodity,andattemptspinitdownintermsofwelfareeconomics,publicgood,socialefficiencyandmore.Heconcludes,“thevalueofinformationisprobabilistic,ratherthandeterministic,anddependsonthereturnsfrom(future)useofinformation.Batesaddsthatthestockvalueofinformationmaybeaffectedbythetransferof

6Snowhill,Lucia(1989)Privatizationandavailabilityoffederalinformationinmicroform:TheReaganyears.MicroformReview18:203-2097Ball,Molly(23April2014)ThePrivatizationBacklash.TheAtlantic.https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/04/city-state-governments-privatization-contracting-backlash/361016/

5

theinformationtoothers.8VarianandShapirodiscussprivatizationandoutsourcingasanunderlyingprincipleofinformationpolicyandsuggestthat,withsomelimitations(primarilysecurityandprivacyconcerns)governmentneednotundertaketheactualproductionofinformationitselfandthatcontractorsmaybeabletodoabetterjob9

[slide11]Bringingthismorecloselytothefieldoflibrariesandcollection,Iwanttopointtotwoundatedblogposts(probablyabout3yearsold)thatlistreasonsfor10andagainst11privatizationofpubliclibrariesintheUK.Theargumentsconsiderprivatizationintermsofcostssaving,governance,andpublicgood.Amongtheargumentsisthat

“Librarieswillloseboththeiruniquesellingpointandtheirequallyimportantneutrality.”

Itisthispointthatworriesmethemostaboutextensiveprivatizationoflibrary content–ifwedon’townit,ifwedon’tcontrolit,wearenotfreetouseit.And aslongasweareundercommercialcontract,wearenotfree.

I’dlikeinthiscontexttoquoteJimmyWales,co-founderofWikipediaina2016interview12[slide12]

Andsoit’soneofthethingsthatpeoplesay,“Well,whydon’tyouputadsinWikipedia?Whykeephavingtoraisemoneyasacharity?”AndoneofthethingsIsayis,nomatterhowmuchIbelievethatwewouldcontinue,orthatIwouldwantustocontinue,justintheDNAoftheorganization,organizationsalwaystendtofollowthemoney.Andit’snotthatWikipediawouldturnevil,butitwouldcertainlyturnlessinterestedinthedevelopingworld.Itwouldbecomemoreinterestedinwhatyou’rereadingatWikipedia.Soifeverybody’sreadingaboutElizabethanPoetry,there’snothingtosellthem.WereallywantyoutoreadabouthotelsinLasVegasandthingsthathavegoodadrevenue.Andsosuddenlyyoudo.Nomatterhowhardyoutry,itwouldchangetheincentives

8Bates,BenjaminJ.Informationasaneconomicgood.In:Ruben,B.D.(1990).Mediation,informationandcommunication.NewBrunswick:TransactionPubl.9Shapiro,Carl,Varian,HalR.(1997).USinformationpolicy.PresentedatHighlandsForum,DepartmentofDefense,June8,1997,Wash-ington,DC.SponsoredbytheOfficeoftheAssistantSecretaryofDefense(Command,Control,CommunicationsandIntelligence).10Privatisationofpubliclibraries:reasonsinfavourhttp://www.publiclibrariesnews.com/campaigning/privatized-libraries-outsourcing-library-services/pro11Privatisationofpubliclibraries–Reasonsagainsthttp://www.publiclibrariesnews.com/campaigning/privatized-libraries-outsourcing-library-services/con12JimmyWales(8Sept2016)Thesumofallhumanknowledge[interviewwithKristaTippett]OnBeinghttps://onbeing.org/programs/jimmy-wales-the-sum-of-all-human-knowledge-2/

6

oftheorganizationtotrytochangetheshapeofWikipediaratherthanbeingthisreallypure,community-drivenpublicservicemission.

[slide13]VI. PrivatizationintheUK1979-2001MargaretThatcher,electedin1979,madeprivatizationacenterpieceofhereconomicpolicy.Between1979and2001theUKgovernmentprivatizedover50companies,mostlyinutilities(power,water),telecommunication,railandmore13.IntheUKthe1983InformationTechnologyAdvisoryBoard’s(ITAP)reportMakingabusinessofinformationtreatedgovernmentinformationasapurelycommercialproductandasanactivityforbusinesswiththeemphasisontradableinformation14.AmongtheservicesprivatizedwasHMSO–HerMajesty’sStationaryOffice.ThinkofHSMOasaUKequivalentofGPOinthatitproducedanddisseminatedofficialgovernmentinformation.

HMSO,muchlikeGPOhasalonghistory15withmanysimilarities.Itwasfoundedin1786ironicallyasameasureagainstcorruptionandexploitationfromthepublicsectorforstationarysupply16.[slide14]ButtheinformationpolicycontextintheUKwasdifferentthanintheUS,especiallyin1980.TheUKdidnothaveaFreedomofInformationActuntil2000,andtheUKhasCrowncopyright,meaningUKgovernmentpublicationsarenotinthepublicdomain.Theinclusionofgovernmentpublicationincopyrightprotectionisofspecialsignificancesinceitpermitstheexclusionoftheprivatesectororthemaintenanceofexclusivearrangementswithpreferredfranchisees.UndertheBerneConventionmostinternationalcopyrightissuesareuniform,exceptArticle2Sections4,whichallowscountriestodetermineforthemselveswhetherornotcopyrightwillincludegovernmentinformation17.InEngland,forexample,the

13Parker,David(2004).TheUK'sPrivatisationExperiment:ThePassageofTimePermitsaSoberAssessment.PresentedatCESIFOConference,Nov2003(availablefromSSRN).14 InformationTechnologyAdvisoryPanel.Makingabusinessofinformation:asurveyofnewopportunities.HMSP,1983. 15DetailedhistoryofHMSO:HerMajesty’sStationaryOfficehistory,Source:InternationalDirectoryofCompanyHistories,Vol.7.St.JamesPress,1993.ReproducedbyFundingUniverse:http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/her-majesty-s-stationery-office-history/16OfficeofPublicSectorInformation.Wikipedia.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Public_Sector_InformationandHSMOHistoryhttp://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/her-majesty-s-stationery-office-history/17 PeterN.WeissandPeterBacklund(1996).“InternationalInformationPolicyinConflict”TheComputerLawandSecurityReport,12at384.

7

doctrineofCrownCopyrightextendstovirtuallyanythingthatisnotcopyrightedbyaprivateentity18.InadditiontoCrownCopyright,theUKparliamentmaintainsParliamentaryCopyrightonitspublications,whichallowsgreaterfreedominreproducingsomeparliamentarymaterialbecauseofitsuniquenature19.CrowncopyrightisjustoneofmanyinstancesofhowinformationisregardedintheUKtobeacommodity.In1979,withtheelectionofMargaretThatcher,HMSOneededtodemonstratenewcostefficiencyatanycost.FirstHMSO'sstaffwascutby10percentin1980andfuturecutsfollowed.Thatsameyear,HMSOwontherighttochargegovernmentclientsfortheirorders,shiftingthebudgetaryburdenfromHMSOtocustomers,whofoundnewincentivestocutwaste.HMSOwasprivatizedincrementallybetween1980and1985andfullprivatizationannouncedinparliamentin1995.TodayTSOfunctionsasafullycommercialbusinesswiththeexclusionofasmallsetofparliamentarypublications.

WhichcopyrightwillapplytoHMSOpublicationsafterprivatizationwasattheheartofthedebatein1995.OnOctober19th.1995,theBritishgovernmentannouncedtheprivatizationofHMSO.ThiscausedanuproarinParliament,andraisedconsiderableconcernregardingtheeffectofcurrentpricinglevelsofparliamentarymaterialsonpublicaccesstoinformation.Theconcernwasrootedinrecentexperiencesoftheresultsofamorecommercialapproachtopublishinganddistributinggovernmentinformation.Afterprivatization,HMSOlostitscontracttopublishtheBusinessmonitorsproductionseriestoTaylorNelson.Oneofthemajoreffectsofthischangehasbeenonprice:Businessmonitorsweremodestlypricedat9.35Poundsforannual,and25Poundsforquarterlymonitors.TheyhavebeenrepackagedasUKMarketsin91annualand36quarterlyreports,pricedatbetween65Poundsand225Poundseach(or4,950forthecompleteset).TaylorNelsonsuppliesthedataonCD-ROMandbyfaxbut,sincetheydon’thaveadistributionnetwork,thehard-copyreportsaresoldontheirbehalfbyHMSO.Theotherimportanteffectisontherighttocopydata.TaylorNelsonclaimthateachA4unit(eachpage)isanindividualcopyrightworkandcannotbecopiedundertheusualfairdealingprovision.Thisisanexampleofgovernmentdata,collectedatthetaxpayer’sexpense,beingsoldforahighpricebyacommercialpublisher,withsevererestrictionsonuseofthedata20.

18 Marshall(1993)“CrownCopyright:NavigatingtheWaters”.CanadianLawLibraries18(4). 19 DavidButcher(1995).“BritishOfficialPublishing:FutureUncertain”.TheLawLibrarian26(4)at489. 20 Butcherat490.

8

TheBritishLibraryAssociationalsoexpressedanxietyovertheprivatizationofHMSO,andwasespeciallyconcernedwithsafeguardingthepublicinformationroleofgovernmentpublications,HMSO’sbibliographicfunctionsandthediscountsHMSOgivestomanylibraries21.Publiclibrarianshavepointedoutthat,apartfromtheincreaseinprice,thereisnoincentiveforthemtopurchasetheTaylorNelsondata,sincetheywillbeunabletopermittheirreaderstophotocopyanyway22.

[slide15]VII. Privatizationofgov’tinformation–US,1980’sWritingin1989,Moodywritesthatthe“Reaganadministrationseemsnottoseegovernmentinformationasasocialgoodbutasacommercialproduct.Thegrowthofthisfree-enterpriseideahashadtwodistinctresults:(1)thegovernmentitselfistreatinginformationasacommodityforwhichitneedstochargeitsusersincreasinglyhigherprices;(2)thegovernmentisencouragingtheprivatizationofpublicinformation.Thesaleofinformationcollectedattaxpayers'expensebytheprivatesector23.Moodyprovidesexamplesandnumbersthatillustratetheconsequencesofprivatizationforjournalaccess.Overallfollowingoutsourcingandprivatizationjournalaccesswasweakened.Sometitleswenolongerdistributedtodepositorylibraries,HHS(HealthandHumanServices)periodicalssawaprintincreaseof82.4%..PopulartitlessuchasOccupationalOutlookHandbookincreased8.50to20$.Takeonenarrowinterestjournal–NavelResearchLogisticsQuarterly.BeforeprivatizingNTISiswasfreetoFDLPlibraries,was$22annuallyfromGPO,andafterpassingproductiontoWileywasnolongeravailabletoFDLPlibrariesandsubscriptionscostincreasedby270%.

TwocasestudiesinprivatizationareNTISandLandSat.Forlackoftime,wewillfocusonthecaseofLandSatasNTISisalittlemorefamiliartothegeneralpublic

[slide16]VII.1 Landsat5ThecaseofprivatizingLandsat5,maynotbewidelyknown,butitiswellresearched,includingabookandscholarlyarticles.Agoodsummaryisavailable

21 “UproaroverHMSOprivatization”.LibraryAssociationRecord98(2):58 22 HowardPicton(1996).“Accessofofficialpublications:threatsandresponses”.Refer12(2)at11 23Moody,Marilyn(1989)Governmentinformation.RQ26(4):425-433

9

froma2009NASAupdate,nowavailableonlyonthewaybackmachine,andarchivedthroughtheEndofTermHarvest:24[slide17]ThelandRemote-SensingSatellite(Landsat)programconsistsoffivesatelliteslaunchedbytheFederalgovernmentfrom1972to1984.TheSatellitescarrysensorscalled“multispectralScanners”and“ThematicMappers”,whichrecordandmeasureelectromagneticenergyreflectedfromscenesorobjectsonearth,andtransmitthemtoreceivingstationsontheground.Thesedatacanbeturnedintophotographicimagesorothergraphicalformatsforuseinapplicationsinagriculture,forestry,fishing,mineralexploration,landandwaterresources,management,hydrology,geologyandmapping,pollutionmonitoring,andcoastalzonemanagement.ThedataareusedprimarilybyagenciesoftheFederalgovernment,stateandlocalofficials,foreigngovernments,researchers,andselectedprivatecompanies25.

[slide18]PresidentCartermadethefirstpolicydecisionleadingtocommercializationin1979andtheelectionofReaganacceleratedtheprocessandmovingtheprojectfromNASAtoNOAA26.TheyearLandsat5waslaunchedCongressdecidedthatlandsatellitescouldbeprivatized(1984LandRemoteSensingCommercializationAct)27.NOAA,theagencyinchargeofallLandsatoperations,wasinstructedtofindacommercialvendorforLandsatdata.NOAAselectedEarthObservationSatelliteCompany(EOSAT).ThecontractgaveEOSATtheresponsibilityforarchiving,collectinganddistributingcurrentLandsatdataaswellastheresponsibilityforbuilding,launchingandoperatingthefollowingtwoLandsatsatellites(withgovernmentsubsidies).

Eisenbeis’studyrevealedunfortunatechangesinaccess,availabilityandpreservationofLandsatdatasincetheoperationofthesystemsbyEOSAT.Pricesforphotographicimages,theleastexpensivetypeofLandsatdataavailable,increasedgraduallyuntil1989whenpricesroseasmuchas500%.WhileEOSAT

24NASA.(14May2009)Landsat5.Origingallink[http://landsat.gsfc.nasa.gov/about/landsat5.html]Waybackmachinehttp://eot.us.archive.org/eot/20090514050613/http://landsat.gsfc.nasa.gov/about/landsat5.html25 EvanMcKenzie(1996).“Privatizinggovernmentinformation”.Governmentinformationquarterly13(3),at338. 26Landsatprogram.Wikipedia.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landsat_programaccess6/9/17.27 LandRemote-SensingCommercializationActof1984,U.S.Code,vol.15,secs.4201-92(1988).

10

didofferawidervarietyofproductswithcostsavingsforthemostexpensiveproducts,thelessexpensiveoneshadeitherincreasedsignificantlyinpriceorwerenolongeravailable.ProductavailabilitywasannouncedinvariousEOSATpublication,ranginginpricefromafreenewsletter,toaMultispecturalUser’sGuidewhichcost$975.PreservationwasaffectedbyEOSAT’sstrategyofoperatingthesatellitesensorsonlywhenfillingapurchaseorder.Thisstrategyreducedthesizeofthelandremotesensingdataarchivebyeliminatingaregular,continuousdataflow.Toresearchersexploringglobalenvironmentalchange,thelossofarepetitiveandcontinuousdatastream,aswellastheinterruptiontothelengthofrecordfortheLandsatdata,wasunconscionable.CustomersarerequiredbyEOSATtosignapre-purchaseagreementwhichrestrictsuseofLandsatdatabyeliminatingthepurchaser’srighttoreproduceorsharethedata.Lackingatruecopyright,EOSAThopedtopreventunauthorizeddisclosureofLandsatdataandtostopthedata-swappingcustomaryamongacademicusers28.EisenbeisconcludedthattheLandsatActallowedtheDepartmentofCommercetoenterintoancontractwithEOSATwhichenablesthecompanytotreatapublicgood(Landsatdata)asaprivategood29.[slide19]ThelessonoftheLandsatsatellitedatahadbeenlearned.Intheclosingdaysofthe102dCongress,legislatorspassedPublicLaw102-55530,whichrepealstheLandRemoste-SensingCommercializationActof1984,thusendingthe“experiment”whichsonegativelyaffectedtheresearchuseofremotesensingdataacquiredfromtheLandsatsatellites31

WhereisLandsatnow?

“Giventhisoutcryandtheunexpectedoutcomeofprivatization,theBushAdministrationfacilitatedtheLandRemoteSensingPolicyActof1992,whichinstructedLandsatProgramManagementtobuildagovernment-ownedLandsat7.TwoyearsafterthelaunchofLandsat7,SpaceImaging(formerlyEOSAT)returnedoperationalresponsibilityforLandsat4andLandsat5backtotheU.S.Government.OnJuly1,200lwhenoperationalcontrolwasofficiallyreturnedtothefederalgovernment,SpaceImagingalsorelinquishedtheircommercialrighttoLandsat

28 Eisenbeis,at141-144. 29 Eisenbeis,at150. 30 LandRemoteSensingPolicyActof1992,U.S.Code,vol15,secs.5601-72(1992). 31 Eisenbeis,at157.

11

data,enablingtheUSGStosellallLandsat4andLandsat5datainaccordancewiththeUSGSpricingpolicy.”32

[slide20]VIII. PrivatizationandFreedomofInformationTheFreedomofInformationAct,animportantyetflawedmechanismforreceivingpublicinformation,willwithoutadoubt,beweakenedbyprivatization.Whileintheory,atleastatthefederallevels,contractorsmuchcomplywithFOIA,therealityisthattheydon’t.Theweakening,orreducedaccountability,wasalsonotedina2006CRSreport33.JournalistsandFirstAmendmentgroupsprovideevidencetotheproblemonboththestateandfederallevels34.Onthestatelevel,alawreviewarticlefrom200035,writtenatthepeakofthelastwaveofinterest,cautionsthat“moststatestatutesprovidingforfreedomofaccesstogovernmentdocumentsdonotexplicitlygrantaccesstodocumentsthatareinthehandsofprivateentities”.[slide21+22]IX. Privatizationandtheroleofthelibraryasinformationmarket.Iknowfrommyexperienceasaneducator,thatstudentsaresurprisedwhentheyfirstlearninclassabouttheeconomicforcesthatrulethelibrary,andtheyaresurprisedwhenIspendagoodpartofmygeneralreferencecoursetalkingaboutmergersandacquisitions.Oftentheeffectsofprivatizationonresearchoutputaredifficulttoassessduetothechallengesofmeasuringactivitythatfailedtoexist.Partnershipswithprivatesectortodigitizematerials,havefailedtoprovidebenefitstolibrary,andoneneedonlymentiontheGooglebooksprojects.Librariansandarchivistshavemadegreatefforttomakeprintpublicrecordsaccessible,butquestionsareemergingarounddigitalaccessandhowto“sustainablyfunddigitizationprojects

32NASA.(14May2009)Landsat5.Origingallink[http://landsat.gsfc.nasa.gov/about/landsat5.html]Waybackmachinehttp://eot.us.archive.org/eot/20090514050613/http://landsat.gsfc.nasa.gov/about/landsat5.html33Kosar,KevinD.(28Dec2006).PrivatizationandtheFederalGovernment:AnIntroduction:CRSReportforCongress.https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc815384/34Barstow,DavidT.(2010).TheFreedomofinformationActandtheFreedomofthePress:ObstructionorTransparency?SocialScience77(3):805-810.35Feiser,Graig,G.(2000).Protectingthepublic’srighttoknow:Thedebateoverprivatizationandaccesstogovernmentinformationunderstatelaw.FloridaStateUniversityLawReview27(4)

12

forrecordsheldinpublicinstitutionsandwhoshouldpayforvalue-addedsearchanddiscoverytoolstofacilitateuseofthedigitizedrecords”.36[slide23]X. Privatizationandtheroleofthelibraryasknowledgewarehouse.Ihavesatthroughendlesspanelsandreadendlesspapersdebating“whatisinformation”andIhavenointentionofignitingthatdebatehere.ForourpurposesIwillinterpretAlexPang’sknowledgewarehouseasourlibrarycollections(anequallygoodalternativeisthatourknowledgewarehousearelibrarians,butthatwillbetoomuchofadigressionforthistalk).Collections,particularlywhenitcomestogovernmentinformation,isoneofthesoapboxesIstandIwheneverIhaveanopportunity.Ilosesleepoverthefactthatmanyofushavegivenuponcollectionsinfavoroflinking.Andtrustme,Idogetboththeadvantagesandtheinevitabilityoflinking.Inaworldwherewelicensecontent,whatLorcanDempsycallthefacilitatedmodel,governmentcollectionsofferusanopportunitytoan‘owned’model,wherelibrarieshavephysicalcustodyofitems37andatthesametimeparticipateinthefacilitatedmodel.IwouldliketoquoteDempsydirectlyhere,askyoutoreadthiswithme,andpauseonthebold(inoriginal)sectionsoncollectionsasaservice.

Thereissomediscussionaboutashiftfromcollectionstoservices.AnotherwayofthinkingaboutwhatIhavecalledthefacilitatedcollectionhereistomovetowardsthinkingaboutcollectionsasaservice.Librarieswillcontinuetobuildcollections,althoughthelevelofactivitywilldifferacrosslibraries.Atthesametime,itseemslikelythatfacilitatedcollectionsofvarioustypeswillgrowinimportance.

Tome,collectionsasaservice,meansonething–ifwearenotcollectingforouruserswearenotdoingourjob.Thistransition,btw,issimilartoonethatoccurredinreferenceservices,toreferenceasinstruction.Butbacktocollections-as-a-service.Whilewemaydomanythingsinthelibrary,atthecoreofourraisond'etreisthatweareasPangsaidknowledgewarehouse,andthatdependsonstockingourwarehouse,andforthatweneedtocollectlocally.

36Kriesberh,Adam(2014).Public-PrivatePartnershipsandtheFutureofDigitalAccessinUSStateArchives.Proceedingsofthe15thAnnualInternationalConferenceonDigitalGovernmentResearch,pp341-342.ACMDigitalLibrary37LorcanDempsey.Thefacilitatedcollection(2016Jan31)http://orweblog.oclc.org/towards-the-facilitated-collection/

13

Privatizinggovernmentinformationcouldpotentiallyfirstpreventusfromgainingfreeaccesstopublicinformation,andnextpreventusfrommakingthispublicallyavailableundercopyrightrestrictions.Itcouldpotentiallybetreatedaslicensedcontent.

[slide24]

XI. AbreakfromvaluesPrivatizationofgovernmentinformationsignifiesabreakfromthevaluesonwhichourinformationsystemwasfounded.TheUnitedStateshasalongtraditionofviewinginformationasapublicasset,whichbestbenefitsthecitizenrywhenitismadeavailabletothepubliconatimelybasisandinanaccessiblemanner.TheUSgovernment,isamajorcreator,collector,useranddisseminatorofinformation.Soundscientificresearch,thepublichealthandsafety,andtheimpartialcollectionanddistributionoftaxreceiptsareafewofthenationalprioritiesthatdependonfederalinformationsystems38.AmericanfederalinformationpolicyischaracterizedbyanapproachthatreliesonastrongFreedomofInformationAct,nogovernmentcopyright,feeslimitedtocostofdisseminationandnolimitsonuse.Thedesiretocultivateaninformedcitizenryisatthebasisofseverallegislativeacts,meanttoencourageaccesstoofficialinformationTheUSinformationpolicyhassignificantFirstAmendmentcomponents.Onthefederallevel,theseareseenintheCopyright’sAct’sexclusionongovernmentcopyrightandintheFreedomofInformationAct’sinsistencethatgovernmentinformationnotspecificallyexempt,bereleasedatnomorethanthecostofsearchandduplication.Thesevaluesstandinthewayofeffortsbygovernmentagenciestocommercializetheirinformation39.

XII. ConclusionPrivatizationisbecomingincreasinglycommonacrosstheworldbutmeasurableresultsregardingtheadvisabilityofthispracticearejustbeginningtosurface.Thedatathathasemergedsofarseemstoindicatethatprivatizationisnotworkinginfavorofthepublicatwhoseexpenseinformationisgeneratedandwhomitismeanttoserve.Thereseemstobegeneralconfusionamongthoseengaginginprivatizationastothebenefitscosts,bothinmonetaryandpublicservice,ofthisact.Benchmarkingmodelsofferedtostateandlocalagenciesfailtoconsidertheveryessenceofinformationanditsimportancetosociety.Decisionsregardinginformationpolicyaretimeandagainaffectedbyeconomicconsiderations,whilelong-termimplicationsarenottakenintoaccount.The

38 PeterN.WeissandPeterBacklund(1996).“InternationalInformationPolicyinConflict”TheComputerLawandSecurityReport,12at382. 39 PeterN.WeissandPeterBacklund(1996).“InternationalInformationPolicyinConflict”TheComputerLawandSecurityReport,12at384.

14

libraryandinformationcommunityhasreasonforconcernoverthecommercializationofinformationsinceitinterfereswiththeveryessenceofourprofessionalresponsibility.Fromaninternationalperspective,theexistenceofmanydifferent,andoftencontradictorylawsandstatusregardinginformationindifferentcountries,obstructstheunrestrictedflowofinformationthatisnecessaryforacademicresearch,scientificprojectsandforgenerallycreatinganinformedcitizenry.Oneofthegreatdangersofthisphenomenalayinthefactthelibraryandinformationsciencecommunityisatlarge,unawareofthistrend.Privatizationisnotpartofthepolicyagendaofinformationprofessionals.Thiscreatesasituationwhereagradualerosionintheaccess,availabilityandpreservationofpublicinformationisoccurring,embodiedinlegislativeprocedures.WhilethelessonoftheLandsatexperiencehasbeenlearned,privatizationtoitsvariousforms,isstilldeliberatedbymanygovernmentsandgovernmentagencies.Whileitwouldnotbeadvisable,ornecessary,toattempttopreventprivatizationattempts,itisofparamountimpotencethatthoseengaginginitadaptmeasuresandguaranteestoensureunrestrictedaccesstoinformation.

6/22/17

1

PRIVATIZATION OF GOVERNMENT INFORMATION FROM THE 1980S TO TODAY

Presented at WALDO conference,

Debbie Rabina. Pratt Institute, New York.

drabina@pratt.eduSlides, text, complete bibliography and image credits are available upon request

§We will try to understand the privatization of information by examining its extent and scope § (which kind of information services are being privatized, and

where) and its effects.

2

6/22/17

2

1. The public has a right of access to public information.

2. The Federal Government should guarantee the integrity and preservation of public information, regardless of its format.

3. The Federal Government should guarantee the dissemination, reproduction and redistribution of public information.

4. The Federal Government should ensure a wide diversity of sources of access, private as well as governmental, to public information.

5. The Federal Government should not allow cost to obstruct the public’s access to public information.

access, availability and preservation[missing: Gov’t commitment to collect information]

3

I. Introduction

II. Outline

III. The context

IV. Why privatization, why now

V. The economic value of information

VI. Privatization in the UK 1979-2001: HMSO

VII. Privatization of gov’t information –US, 1980’s : LandSat 5

VIII. Privatization and Freedom of Information

IX. Privatization and the role of the library as information market

X. Privatization and the role of the library as knowledge warehouse.

XI. A break from values

XII. Conclusion

4

6/22/17

3

5

Today's libraries are incubators, collaboratories, the modern equivalent of the 17th-century coffeehouse: part information market, part knowledge warehouse, with some workshop thrown in for good measure-- Alex Soojung-Kim Pang

6

6/22/17

4

7

AT RISK COLLECTIONS/SERVICES

• American Community Survey• EPA publications • Open data on data.gov• Gateways such as Science.gov• The activities or content from GPO • Open-access legislation

8

Privatiz[s]ation:

The transfer of responsibility for an industry or the ownership of a company from the public to the private sector.

6/22/17

5

9

10

The value of information is probabilistic, rather than deterministic, and depends on the returns from (future) use of information.

6/22/17

6

11

Libraries will lose both their unique selling point and their equally important neutrality.

Privatisation means that public libraries may become another commercial space in the High Street.

12

No matter how hard you try, it would change the incentives of the organization to try to change the shape of Wikipedia rather than being this really pure, community-driven public service mission.

6/22/17

7

§ No Freedom of Information Law until 2000

§ Crown copyright (no public domain)

§ Thatcher elected 1979

§ Massive privatisation across all industries

13

§ HMSO: Her Majesty’s stationary Office privatized 1980-85 and finally in 1995.

§ Founded 1786

§ Today’s functions as a fully commercial business with the exclusion of a small set of parliamentary publications

§ Effects on access:§ Journal Business monitors increase

(print)9.35 to 25 pounds. § CD edition 225 pounds§ Company claims copyright on each page

so libraries can not reuse them.

14

6/22/17

8

15

(1)the government itself is treating information as a commodity for which it needs to charge its users increasingly higher prices;

(2) the government is encouraging the privatization of public information.

§ Some titles no longer part of FDLP

§ (Health and Human Services) periodicals saw an increase of 82.4%

§ Occupational Outlook Handbook increased 8.50 to 20$.

§ Navel Research Logistics Quarterly. § Before privatizing NTIS is was free to FDLP libraries, was $22 annually from GPO, and after

passing production to Wiley was no longer available to FDLP libraries and subscriptions cost increased by 270%.

16

6/22/17

9

17

LandSat satelliteReturn photographic images or other graphical formats for use in applications in

agriculture, forestry, fishing, Mineral exploration, land and water resources management, hydrology, geology and mapping, pollution monitoring, and coastal zone management.

Data are used primarily by agencies of the Federal government, state and local officials, foreign governments, researchers, and selected private companies

§ Move from NASA to NOAA

§ 1984 Land Remote Sensing Commercialization Act

§ NOAA selected Earth Observation Satellite Company (EOSAT) to operate Landsat5

§ Prices for images rose as much as 500%.

§ Less expensive became unavailable

§ Images were taken only be prior order, lack of continuous data flow and preservation

§ Customers were denied right to reproduce or share the data

18

6/22/17

10

§ 1992: Congress repeals the Land Remote-Sensing Commercialization Act of 1984

§ LandSat 7 was operated commercially from 1994-2001

§ 2001: operational control was officially returned to the federal government, Space Imaging (formerly EOSAT) also relinquished their commercial right to Landsat data, enabling the USGS to sell all Landsat 4 and Landsat 5 data in accordance with the USGS pricing policy.”

access, availability and preservation

19

20

• Contractors almost always avoid FOIA

• FOIA for contractors on state level is often unavailable

6/22/17

11

21

Today's libraries are incubators, collaboratories, the modern equivalent of the 17th-century coffeehouse: part information market, part knowledge warehouse, with some workshop thrown in for good measure-- Alex Soojung-Kim Pang

§Maintaining our independence in face of effort to monetize us and the information we use

22

6/22/17

12

§ Lorcan Dempsy§ There is some discussion about a shift from collections to services. § Another way of thinking about what I have called the facilitated collection here is to move

towards thinking about collections as a service.§ Libraries will continue to build collections, although the level of activity will differ across

libraries.§ At the same time, it seems likely that facilitated collections of various types will grow in

importance.

§ If are not collecting for our users we are not doing our job.

23

§ Privatization represents of break for the values governing public information in the US

§ Privatization creates a situation where a gradual erosion in the access, availability and preservation of public information is occurring, embodied in legislative procedures.

§ Privatization has not delivered on its promises, yet the practice continues

24