"Public ownership of information created by the federal government is an essential right. It not only allows individuals to fulfill their civic responsibilities, but also contributes to an overall improvement in their quality of life. Current information technology not only brings with it expanded opportunities for using government information but also a number of difficulties, including adequacy of finding tools, technological compatibilities, and sometimes just the overwhelming amount of information." ~ A Comprehensive Assessment of Public Information Dissemination by the U.S. National Commission on Libraries and Information Science.
The United States Government Manual is an excellent introduction to our federal government.The current edition is found on GPO Access. Use it frequently. I would have a copy on my desk.
Be familiar with the Complete Guide to Citing Government Information Resources: A Manual for Social Science & Business Research (ALA, 2003.
FedBuzz indexes daily news from the federal government, including information policies and issues.
The crucial question is the degree to which government information should be limited to use by those in government versus the notion that information by and about government should be widely available to the public.
Here are some useful think about questions:
Several of the founding fathers believed strongly that government must be accountable to the citizens and that requires "adequate and equitable" public access. However, the definition of "adequate" and "equitable" varies notably. The "people's right to know, to be informed, and to hold government accountable" has not often been a concern of those who govern. That has been especially true in the last few years.
Government information inevitably involves politics or political overtones. To what degree can government information be objective? To what degree can those who work outside of government information be objective and neutral on political issues?
Is government information an oxymoron? Isn't government information really political information since it largely reflects the views of the political party in power in Congress and the White House?
What is the difference between government information and public relation? Doesn't government information exist to make the government look good? In many countries, government information is so frequently manipulated as to be nearly worthless. For example, CIA predictions of a massive Soviet military capability were used to justify substantially larger arms budgets and a larger CIA. The predictions later proved to be wildly inaccurate. If government information is merely self-serving, it is a logical target for budget cuts and critics of "big government."
Those who see government information as propaganda will want to eliminate it as much as possible on the belief that no government information can be objective.
A large proportion of government employees are information workers. The inputs or raw material of government are information. Inputs might be information about voter preferences, what interest groups and powerful individuals want, the state of the economy, threats foreign and domestic, imports and exports, the number of U.S. citizens with graduate degrees in a pure or applied science. Outputs are information in the form of decisions, laws, policies, and regulations. While government is information, most information is not governmental. Still, a large proportion of information is produced by government or based upon information collected and made available by government agencies. At one time, the GPO was the largest printer/publisher in the world.
Documents are intended for internal use or for those employed by government agencies. Publications are intended for external use or for those outside government agencies. However, the two terms are often used interchangeably.
Government exists at many levels. For example, the SIS Faculty are somewhat involved in governing the School [largely curriculum matters].
"Government publications, or other government information products, regardless of form or format, created or compiled by government employees, or at government expense, or as required by law" belong to the public whose taxes pay for the effort and who need to know what their government is doing." However, this often does not apply when government work is outsourced.
"Government information required for official use only or for strictly administrative or operational purposes which have no public interest or educational value and information classified for reasons of national security need not be shared with the public."
Discussion questions:
In which of the following cases does information created by this person belong to the public? What about work for hire?
Librarians are primarily focused on maximum access to government information.
In an ideal world, all three branches of government would fully inform the public about governmental decisions. Here are some principles to consider.
The public right of access to government information depends on the willingness of government to share that information. This is NOT a constitutionally protected right. Freedom of the press is protected for those who have a press, but the Constitution does not require government to make information available to the public or even to those effected. Access to government information depends on the good will of legislators and managers in the executive branch.
What incentives are there for government to create reasonably objective information and share it with the public?
The information industry wants access to current, useful government information as the basis for value-added products. It fears unfair competition if government provides access to consumer friendly content. For example, the industry fought long and hard to prevent the SEC from sharing public company information via a consumer-friendly website.
Some similar and some quite different principles:
What does the term "add value" to government information mean?
While information may want to be free, and we may want it to be free as information providers or users, information is not free. There are costs associated with creating and sharing information. Money spent on creating and sharing government information is money that is not spent on some other activity. Which members of society are most likely to believe that shared government information is a high priority?
Who pays is a pivotal question. Taxpayers pay for government collected information. If government does not collect needed information, it may be collected by a non-profit agency or a for-profit one. Often, trade associations of for-profit firms collect information from members and make that information available to members. While the tax payer is then spared some expense, the information gathered is not available to government decision makers or to members of the community. Those who are affluent are likely to be able to purchase the information that they need. Those who are less affluent are likely to lack access to information that could make a difference in their decision-making and in the quality of their life.
If democracy depends upon a well-informed citizenry, it is important that citizens and the media have access to detailed information about the activities of government agencies and employees. To what degree does the citizenry want to be well-informed?
OMB Circular A-130 makes an important distinction between access and dissemination. "Access is providing members of the public, on THEIR REQUEST, information to which they are legally entitled. Dissemination is providing the public with information without request. Since the public rarely requests government information and often is unaware of its existence, this encourages government agencies to minimize access.
Although the President and the Congress have recently enacted a substantial tax reduction, funding for information programs has been substantially reduced during the last few years. There has been a consistent emphasis on minimizing the cost to the government of the creation, collection, maintenance, use, dissemination, and disposition of information, especially by conservatives. Sometimes, reduced funding is the result of political stands. For example, the budget for the Census Bureau was cut to punish it for advocating sampling [Republicans believe that sampling favors Democrats]. In general, this reduced funding has resulted in:
With limited resources, the question of who should pay for government information becomes important. The taxpayer has already paid once, but should she pay again? How important is cost recovery for the government agency that would like to distribute an item, but cannot afford to do so? If cost recovery is used to set fees, which variables should be included in these calculations? Sometimes, cost recovery policies create fees for access to government information that are unaffordable for ordinary users, but affordable for corporations and the affluent.
A good example of budget and political impact was the U.S. Industrial Outlook, a most useful and popular depository resource. The Department of Commerce reduced scope and content so that the title was much less useful. Then the title went to McGraw-Hill who published it and quickly found it to be unprofitable. The publication ceased. A web-based substitute was proposed.
Historically, the Depository Library System has been the safety net for government information. Depository libraries received and preserved a reasonably large proportion of government information, especially since most important government information was printed and issued by the Government Printing Office. Depository library collections were open to anyone and most libraries provided quality library service to users.
As government publishing is increasingly decentralized and issued via web pages, what can be done to insure that citizens and others have access to information about their government? Two perspectives may be considered. The librarian perspective is that the maximum amount of information should be shared and preserved--that this is a fundamental right. The governmental perspective focuses on need to know. Only those with a need to know should have access to government information. The problem, of course, is that those in power are usually conservative in defining who needs to know.How would you define "need to know"? Only those who work for government?
Privatization became more visible and popular under President Reagan in the early 1980s. The Reagan administration wanted to substantially reduce government regulatory activity and privatization of government information is one way to do that.
Office of Management and Budget Circular A-130 {1985}, Management of Federal Information Resources provided a broad outline of what was wanted:
Given the many negatives that some associate with government information, the strongly held belief by many conservatives that for-profit firms are always more effective and that only users should pay for services provided, Congress has historically been interested in privatizing federal government information by having others, and not a federal government agency, publish the information. An assumption is sometimes made that if few are willing to pay or if for-profit firms are not interested, then the information must be of little value. For example, the U.S. National Cancer Institute contracts with Oxford University Press to publish its journal. The rationale is that OUP issues a better product at lower cost to NCI. However, some research described in articles was paid for by taxpayers and it now leaves the public domain. The subscription price was dramatically increased and some libraries can no longer afford to subscribe.
Most government information is collected as a by-product of some mandated activity. For example, information about work hours, wages, and earnings is collected as part of the unemployment insurance program. This means that few agencies see sharing information as a primary role or responsibility.
The Office of Management and the Budget Circular A-76 required government agencies to make maximum use of private firms for commercial services. While designed to encourage outsourcing and more efficient operation in general, this has encouraged publication outsourcing. In contrast, law and regulation also state that "those members of the public that the agency serves must have a reasonable opportunity to acquire information." "Reasonable opportunity" may have quite different definitions. The public that the agency serves may be seen narrowly as those in a particular industry, for example, and not the public at large. Larger for profit firms are likely to be able to afford the more expensive outsourced publications.
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1990 was designed to make government more efficient and effective. Certainly, there are many true tales of paperwork requirements that were ineffective, inefficient, and inappropriate. However, an administration with a negative attitude toward government information used the Act as a rationale for curtailing collection and sharing of a wide range of government information and limiting the ability of federal agencies to issue regulations.
Circular A-25 required agencies to charge fees to persons or organizations receiving special benefits not made available to the general population
The pricing of government information is largely random, problematic, and inconsistent. In fairness to governmental agencies, setting an equitable, appropriate price is a difficult decision. Minimizing the cost to the government and to the public requires considerable time and effort and is not likely to be wholly successful.
The law only allows an agency to charge for the costs of dissemination and not for the costs associated with gathering that information. Agencies vary in the degree to which they follow this policy. Some agencies only charge minimal reproduction costs that ordinary citizens can afford (if not too many pages are to be reproduced). Other agencies will add costs associated with retrieving and refiling an item, for example.
Cost is difficult to define. It might be:
Agencies are limited to cost recovery. PL 104-13 (1995), limits pricing of government information
Privatization may take several forms:
While the desire of the information industry to limit federal government information activities to collecting raw data and then making that available at minimal cost is understandable, it is clear that most agencies will need to engage in some value added activities--organization and analysis--in order to meet their goals and objectives. This value added information appears in reports and working papers likely to be found on an agency web page.
Perhaps the best implementation of outsourcing for the citizen and the library is when a non-profit organization becomes the publisher. For example, the Commerce Department selected the Conference Board to create and distribute the Index of Leading Economic Indicators thus saving the government about $500,000 per year. The Board will not be paid for the Index and must make it publicly available. Thus, important information remains widely available and a reasonable cost.
In contrast, when many private companies compile a database for a governmental agency, they claim copyright and prevent others from using that information except on their terms. Here, information paid for by public money will not be in the public domain. In fact, the agency itself may have to pay to access its own data. West, the legal publisher, has done this with Federal judicial court reporters by adding head notes and indexing to case information. The information industry continues to lobby for policies to make it difficult for citizens to get information directly from agencies. However, the web has made it much easier for agencies to provide economical access to information without the costs of printing and distribution.
Privatization may have advantages:
Privatization may have disadvantages
How persuasive are the advantages mentioned above?
Poor control of information gathered by governmental agencies has been a problem for many years and has led to law suits. For example, Native Americans have discovered that no or inadequate records are available for monies owed to them by Bureau of Indian Affairs. Federal courts have been extremely critical of agency record keeping. Records have been discarded when they should have been kept. Many records are housed in sites where they are not protected. Intellectual access to many records is minimal. It is fair to conclude that most governmental agencies do not adequately control their information
Management of resources has only recently included information. Many agency managers fail to understand the importance of records and archives. Records are seen as a problem and not as a resource. There is little sense of the historical importance of an agency and its contributions.
When a federal agency is abolished, the Bureau of Mines is an example, some of its records and publications are lost.
While there are laws and regulations on maintaining public records and sharing public information, agencies vary widely in their interest in records and public information. For example, the Clinger-Cohen Information Technology Management Reform Act of 1996 required agencies to appoint a Chief Information Officer (CIO).This may improve record keeping, but will likely have little impact on public access to government information in the typical agency. The emphasis will be on efficiency and cost-savings.
While government information on the web has been a substantial boon for many, problems remain.
Will the document or publication be available next week, next month, or next year? Will it be accessible with future hardware and software? Can preservation work in a decentralized publication system? Presently, no policy, law or legislation insures permanent public access for digital documents or publications. Digital formats are most fragile.
Print documents or publications stay the same. With digital items, it is more difficult to know if its complete or if it has been changed over time. Earlier drafts or editions may simply be deleted. Web documents/publications may be seen by agency staff as more of a public relations activity. There may be an attempt to make the information too popular or too interesting.
While depository collections in public and academic libraries are not especially visible, they are available to those who lack access to the web or who are unable to capture needed information. While some studies find that more than half of U.S. families now have a computer, racial and ethnic minorities are much less like to have this access. Web based access works better for the more educated and affluent members of our society. Still, the economically disadvantaged are not likely to visit depository libraries.
With the exception of academic research libraries and a few metropolitan public libraries, most library government information collections are small with 500 or fewer items. Since government publications are frequently not reviewed in standard sources and depository status is expensive, these items are under represented in the typical collection.
Most users are not familiar with particular government agencies (publishers or corporate authors) or with titles (often not memorable). Few users look for a particular known item.
In smaller libraries, government information is cataloged, classified and integrated into the regular collection. This makes it much easier to find government information when doing a subject search. In larger libraries, government information is often segregated into separate collections arranged by issuing agency classification, i.e. the Superintendent of Documents scheme for U.S. items). Another scheme is used for UN items. Government information is often arranged in a non-intuitive way such as classification by publisher {agency here}. Segregated collections can be convenient by placing all publications of a particular agency together, but they are less likely to be used by the average user. Items not in the regular catalog are invisible to most users. Without intervention, most users will be unaware of services like the Monthly Catalog that provide access to government information.
Although users are likely to also be unaware of search engines and directories dedicated to government information such as Google's Unclesam, the popular engines and directories do a reasonable job with government information. It is easier for a typical user to find government information on the web at home than in most research libraries.The difference is the lack of mediation by an expert.
Most government information is serial in nature--either annuals or periodicals. This can create problems with subject access. Management and funding problems means that government serials may be issued irregularly and suddenly disappear with little notice. Keeping up with missing hard copy issues has been a problem for years.
Even in the librarian community, concern about government information agencies is often limited. Still, the library associations, ALA in particular, have lobbied diligently for policies and procedures that would make government information widely available at minimal cost.
Some journalists share these concerns as do others concerned about intellectual freedom. At the moment, however, their voices do not seem to have the same impact as those in the information and entertainment industries or those concerned with national security and the prevention of "leaks."
The typical citizen has little awareness or interest in government information unless it becomes front page news like the Monica Lewinsky investigations.
Ideally, everyone should be interested in government information since the action, and inaction, of government affects each of us in important ways. The major audiences [not ranked] for government information are:
Statistical and legislative (as well as administrative policy/regulation) information is most frequently sought and used. There appears to be relatively little interest in state or local government information outside one's home state or community. Few outside academe are interested in foreign or international information. Special and academic research library users make the greatest use of government information. Social scientists are relatively heavy users as are some journalists.
The United States has not had a coherent, integrated information policy. It also does not have a central agency for statistics as does Canada. Instead, there are several policies, agency by agency, both formal and informal. Many rules, regulations, agency-directed policies and public laws deal with governmental information, but there is considerable variation from agency to agency. What elements might be included in a federal government information policy?
Only the Department of Agriculture has traditionally had continuing and effective policies to share information with the public via the agricultural extension program in cooperation with land grant universities.
While there is no national information policy, different presidential administrations have de facto policies that impact information creation and distribution. For example, the Bush Administration has placed "friends" on scientific advisory committees who favor a particular political agenda. Similarly, some items on agency websites have been removed because they conflict with administration views.
Besides the opportunity to reduce the cost of government printing via economies of scale, the Government Printing Office provided a central point to capture information about government information. This and the depository library system reduced the number of fugitive items. There has been a continuing tension between the GPO and agencies since agencies prefer to print in house. Photo duplication and web technology made in-house publication cheaper and easier. However, bibliographic control has become less effective and more government information is unknown or known to a few insiders.
Reduced funding for printing and publishing, since these are often considered to be less important, results in more fugitive items. Increasingly, Congressional hearings, for example, are being held, but the proceedings are not being published or are published in very small editions.
National security is frequently invoked to prevent information from being made available to those "without a need to know." The FBI and the CIA have long argued for limited access to a wide range of information because it might be helpful for enemies of the state. The Bush Administration is particularly eager to limit access to any information that might be useful to "terrorists."
Another rationale for withholding information is to protect the privacy of individuals and corporate bodies. The federal government has created Data Integrity Boards to insure that computer data matching does allow individuals who complete forms for a federal agency, for example, to be identified. For example, it is not allowed to match lists of those registered with the selective service with the list of those requesting federally funded student loans. Some question as to the effectiveness of this approach. The best example of privacy failure is the de facto use of the social security account number as a national ID. A wide variety of private records can be accessed via the SSAN.
People often assume that information collected by government agencies must be authoritative. For one reason, government may require reporting and have legal penalties as with the Census. Another assumption is that government employees are subject specialists as well as knowledgeable in research methods. While government information is often authoritative, that is not always the case. Survey instruments may be poorly constructed. Respondents may not respond accurately or completely. Analysis may be flawed or incomplete. Information gathering and analysis may take so long that the information product is dated when released. The Consumer Price Index is often used as an example of a well regarded information product based on the wrong variables and numbers and thus misleading.
The Internet, especially the web, encouraged agencies to create and share new information products. Agencies also felt the possibility of loss of face if their website did not appear to be as attractive or useful as another's.
Congress quickly decided that web based information products would both reduce dissemination costs and increase accessibility. Agencies were ordered to dramatically reduce print products to a few "essential" items. If government information is available on the net, is there a need to distribute it in print and share with the depository program? Since most users want government information issued within the last three years, there seems to be little need for retrospective collections
There is some disagreement about whether these changes will increase or reduce access to government information. In fact, access has substantially increased. Certainly, there is reasonable doubt about the stability or preservation of government information.
Conservatives and some liberals want to make dramatic changes in federal government information:
