[Libs-Or] FW: [oasl-all] .gov websites

Wed Jan 25 13:53:55 PST 2017

I’m sharing this discussion from the OASL email list in the hopes that others in the library community will find it useful. --Arlene

From: oasl-all at ola.memberclicks.net<mailto:oasl-all at ola.memberclicks.net> [mailto:oasl-all at ola.memberclicks.net]
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 1:35 PM
Subject: [oasl-all] .gov websites

Hi Everyone,

I promise not to post a thousand times on this topic, but I wanted to forward some information that my coworker, Arlene Weible, shared with me. I knew that federal government information is generally archived, but I didn’t know the best sources to suggest for finding the archived information. Here’s what Arlene told me; plus, there’s more about the “official” versus “reliable” discussion:

Basically the National Archives is responsible for archiving agency web sites, and here are their official sites from the last two administrations:

https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/

Also, here is a non-governmental effort to capture federal agency web sites at each Presidential Transition: http://eotarchive.cdlib.org/.

Individual documents are also “archived” in the sense that they are downloaded by GPO [Government Printing Office] at the point they are cataloged. If folks have a specific publication they are looking for, I’d suggest searching the Catalog of U.S. Government Information: http://catalog.gpo.gov or Worldcat.

Also, here are a couple of quotes from the recent email discussion among the gov docs librarians about this issue. (See the full discussion here: http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A1=ind1701D&L=GOVDOC-L#6) Basically the thread emphasizes the advantage of government information is that you can “know the source” rather than it actually being factual or reliable. …

I prefer the term "authoritative" or "official" to "reliable" when speaking of government information. When I work with students I attempt to make the distinction clear between official sources and other types of information. To place it in perspective, I would certainly call the website of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea authoritative and official. I would hesitate to call it reliable. Students tend to get that, but when we move to US government sites, they are less likely to perceive our own government's provision of information in a similar light. But perhaps they should. (Jeffrey C. Wanser)

------

When talking with students, I like to compare the evaluation of government information and its creators with that of "random stuff" you find on the Internet.

To the extent that the Federal government is transparent, to the extent that the disclosure and vetting processes are thorough, and to the extent that the media (and other watchdogs) does its job, determining the credentials and perspective of the creators of government information can be much easier. Senior officials in the Executive branch are known to the public through confirmation hearings, speeches, policies, and the media. The Census Bureau publishes its methodology and scholars and other users examine their methodology and data closely. The credentials and perspectives of members of Congress speaking on the floor of the House or Senate or in committee are usually known through easily accessible biographical sources published by the government and commercially as well as through other speeches and contact with their constituents. Both Members and political appointees may be members of a party whose positions are known to the public.

But government transparency, thorough disclosure and vetting, and watchdogging are all essential to making sure that the fair-minded public is able to evaluate the government information (and their creators) that is accessible to them.

In comparison, the credentials and perspectives of the creators of "random stuff" can be very hard to determine accurately because those creators and their work are not necessarily subject to any type of objective evaluation. (Barbara Levergood)

Arlene Weible, MLS
Electronic Services Consultant
Oregon Federal Regional Depository Coordinator
Library Support and Development Services
Oregon State Library
250 Winter St NE
Salem OR, 97301
503-378-5020
arlene.weible at state.or.us<mailto:arlene.weible at state.or.us>
http://oregon.gov/osl/ld/
FOLLOW US: [facebookSmall.png] <https://www.facebook.com/ORLibSupport>  [http://www.thewwwblog.com/images/blogger-logo.jpg] <http://osl-lis.blogspot.com/>  [http://www.aethlonmedical.com/assets/001/5130.png] <https://twitter.com/orlibsupport>  [Picture] <http://www.oregon.gov/OSL/LD/Pages/index.aspx>

On  a related subject, you may not have seen that the ALA’s Office of Intellectual Freedom came out with a statement about President Trump’s administration’s media blackouts: http://www.oif.ala.org/oif/?p=8410. Arlene added that “the Sunlight Foundation is tracking and documenting the source of reports of federal agency censorship, in case anyone would like to see some concrete examples of the issues discussed in the ALA press release: https://sunlightfoundation.com/list-of-federal-government-agencies-told-not-to-communicate-with-the-public.”

Thanks,
Jen

Jennifer Maurer, MLS
School Library Consultant
Library Support and Development Services
Oregon State Library
250 Winter Street NE
Salem, OR 97301
503.378.5011
jennifer.maurer at state.or.us<mailto:jennifer.maurer at state.or.us>

OSLIS || www.oslis.org
Learn to research. Research to learn.
FOLLOW US: [cid:image004.png at 01D0358C.4523C4D0] <https://www.facebook.com/ORLibSupport>   [http://www.thewwwblog.com/images/blogger-logo.jpg] <http://osl-lis.blogspot.com/>   [http://www.aethlonmedical.com/assets/001/5130.png] <https://twitter.com/orlibsupport>   [Picture] <http://www.oregon.gov/OSL/LD/Pages/index.aspx>

From: Jennifer Maurer
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 12:05 PM
To: OASL Listserv (oasl-all at ola.memberclicks.net<mailto:oasl-all at ola.memberclicks.net>) <oasl-all at ola.memberclicks.net<mailto:oasl-all at ola.memberclicks.net>>
Subject: RE: [oasl-all] .gov websites

Hi Eila,

You brought up a good question, and I don’t feel like I have a good answer.

For now, the best advice I can think of is to teach that .gov sites are generally reliable, but information should always be verified / triangulated. Then point out known “trust” exceptions or controversies, especially related to the unit of study.

That said, I ran your question by Arlene Weible, my coworker in Library Support who is our go-to expert on government documents. She mentioned that in gov docs circles, there’s been a discussion about referring to government information as “official” instead of “reliable.” While the expectation is that government information is reliable, what is posted on government websites is subject to influences like the current administration and human imperfection (mistakes). For example, while the censorship or suppression of information is more obvious under the Trump administration, it has occurred under other administrations, too. And, the issue is not isolated to American politics.

            http://ncac.org/resource/research-findings-suppressed-by-government-environmental-science#Obama_-_environmental
            http://www.nature.com/news/nine-years-of-censorship-1.19842

As one example of verifying information, students who need information about climate change could check what other English-speaking countries list on their government websites and compare to what is listed at the U.S. Department of Energy. Other good places for information on the topic would be books from experts, websites from universities that study the issue, websites from organizations with a stance on the issue, etc.

It might be interesting to find pages from the U.S. Department of Energy’s website on the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine. For example, I found this about climate change from 2013. In my experience, text from webpages generally gets archived, but sometimes, extras like PDFs and videos will not.

            https://web.archive.org/web/20131114230629/http://www.whitehouse.gov/share/climate-action-plan<https://web.archive.org/web/20131114230629/http:/www.whitehouse.gov/share/climate-action-plan>
            https://archive.org/web/

There may be other ways to find information that was once on a government website. For example, the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions website uploaded its own copy of President Obama’s Climate Action Plan from 2013.

            https://www.c2es.org/federal/obama-climate-plan-resources

Another avenue of instruction on this topic could be to tell students to be aware of a controversy level, for lack of a better term, and respond accordingly. Some information is accepted as fact with no controversy (like the water cycle) while other topics invite controversy or counter opinions (like climate change). The more a young researcher finds out that a topic is not “neutral,” the more investigating s/he should do to understand all sides of the issue. Not to mention “the other side” of an issue is to present an incomplete picture, even if one disagrees with that side.

I’d watch AASL’s blog, as I suspect this issue might be addressed in the coming weeks.

            http://knowledgequest.aasl.org/

I know I veered off track a bit, but I hope this helps some. In the end, if we are teaching students to be critical consumers (& producers) of information, then we’re on the right track.

Thoughts from others?

Thanks,
Jen

Jennifer Maurer, MLS
School Library Consultant
Library Support and Development Services
Oregon State Library
250 Winter Street NE
Salem, OR 97301
503.378.5011
jennifer.maurer at state.or.us<mailto:jennifer.maurer at state.or.us>

OSLIS || www.oslis.org
Learn to research. Research to learn.
FOLLOW US: [cid:image004.png at 01D0358C.4523C4D0] <https://www.facebook.com/ORLibSupport>   [http://www.thewwwblog.com/images/blogger-logo.jpg] <http://osl-lis.blogspot.com/>   [http://www.aethlonmedical.com/assets/001/5130.png] <https://twitter.com/orlibsupport>   [Picture] <http://www.oregon.gov/OSL/LD/Pages/index.aspx>

From: oasl-all at ola.memberclicks.net<mailto:oasl-all at ola.memberclicks.net> [mailto:oasl-all at ola.memberclicks.net]
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 1:23 PM
To: Jennifer Maurer
Subject: [oasl-all] .gov websites

Hi all,

Let me preface this by saying that I do not intend this to be a political post. My question is, however, the result of politics. Up until now, I have told students that .gov websites are reliable because they are maintained by government agencies whose goal is to educate the public. I have acknowledged that .gov sites might reflect the bias of the current administration, but that the information will be factual and based on solid research.

Now, however, I am wondering if .gov sites will continue to be reliable. I am putting together a list of websites for physical science students to use when researching various sources of energy, and the U.S. Department of Energy site gave me pause. Will this and other .gov sites continue to reliable? How can I know? What do I tell students?

I'm left reeling by the current climate of  "alternative facts," and what it means for information literacy.

Eila Overcash
Teacher-Librarian
Summit High School
2855 NW Clearwater Dr.
Bend, OR 97703
541-355-4034

________________________________
Oregon Library Association • PO Box 3067, La Grande, Oregon 97850, United States
Unsubscribe<mailto:oasl-all at ola.memberclicks.net?subject=Unsubscribe> •  Privacy Policy<http://www.memberclicks.com/emailprivacy/>
[Image removed by sender.]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://omls.oregon.gov/pipermail/libs-or/attachments/20170125/cf0fab82/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ~WRD000.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 823 bytes
Desc: ~WRD000.jpg
URL: <https://omls.oregon.gov/pipermail/libs-or/attachments/20170125/cf0fab82/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image005.png
Type: image/png
Size: 660 bytes
Desc: image005.png
URL: <https://omls.oregon.gov/pipermail/libs-or/attachments/20170125/cf0fab82/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image006.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 859 bytes
Desc: image006.jpg
URL: <https://omls.oregon.gov/pipermail/libs-or/attachments/20170125/cf0fab82/attachment-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image007.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 794 bytes
Desc: image007.gif
URL: <https://omls.oregon.gov/pipermail/libs-or/attachments/20170125/cf0fab82/attachment.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image008.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2098 bytes
Desc: image008.jpg
URL: <https://omls.oregon.gov/pipermail/libs-or/attachments/20170125/cf0fab82/attachment-0002.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image009.png
Type: image/png
Size: 923 bytes
Desc: image009.png
URL: <https://omls.oregon.gov/pipermail/libs-or/attachments/20170125/cf0fab82/attachment-0001.png>